BS: Why closed threads?

Subject: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John P
Date: 05 Apr 12 - 07:21 PM

I've just seen yet another thread get closed. Would it be possible to explain to us why this happens? If it is because of obnoxious people, is it possible to have a way to exclude specific people from threads so the rest of us can keep talking?

With no explanations offered it feels like censorship that's pointed at a group instead of the individuals who are causing problems. Can Max or an elf communicate with the membership about why and how the decision gets made?

Can we, as a group that includes both members and the Mudcat powers-that-be, have a conversation about what to do about trolls and bullies? Anonymous and unexplained deletion of posts and closing of threads isn't sitting very well, and I say that as someone who thinks Mudcat would benefit from having more official moderation.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 05 Apr 12 - 10:04 PM

"Imagine a small remote country town where the the founding mayor owns all the real estate,
dictates all the laws;
and appoints powerful unelected officials who secretly monitor and police the communications and behaviour
of all long term residents and visiting strangers....

In this community, it is not unknown for citizens to experience their phone lines
being suddenly and mysteriously cut off mid conversation for unknown unaccountable reasons.
Mail and newspapers regularly arrive with random lines and paragraphs erased and inked out.
From time to time folk notice that one of their more troublesome and unpopular neighbours,
who frequently came to the attention of town authorities, has quietly dissapeared, never to be seen or heard of again.
Most of the population are content with their lot.
For them this town is a haven of good neighbourliness and happy clapping singing and dancing.
Why would they ever even consider questioning the rules and values of their caring and benevolent Mayor
and controlling officials ?

Be a good citizen and prosper. Unacceptable trouble makers and misfits will not.

Welcome to Mudcat...."


I think I've seen a modern gothic horror movie just like this,
It did not end well.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 05 Apr 12 - 10:24 PM

You gotta be shittin me. You've been here for 12 years and you don't know the rule yet? One rule. Simple. No personal attacks.

And, if you don't like that ONE rule, take it up with Max.

Of course, if you feel that was not the rule you broke, take it up with Max. The mods are not gonna discuss this shit with you publically... nor SHOULD they.

You, nor anybody else, have NO say in how this site is moderated or run in any way. Only the owner does. You are allowed to post here by the owner. Pay him some respect.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Apr 12 - 10:27 PM

"With no explanations offered ..."

I've seen what happens when 'management' tries to explain every decision. The forum then becomes a debate over the rationale FOR the decisions. It has happened right here in years past. If it were a matter of a democratic debate before a vote, it would make sense... but this forum is a privately run place. It IS very free & open on most issues, but when rampant bickering and name calling take over a discussion and the original topic is drowned in seas of irrelevant personal diatribes and accusations, there is often little choice.... like your parents saying, "If you kids don't settle down in the back seat, we are going HOME...not to the beach!"
My father didn't even say anything... he just turned around and drove home.

That probably won't satisfy those who 'think' total freedom of speech is a good idea...but some of us remember how tedious it was when 'they' tried to wait out the nastiness.....

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Apr 12 - 10:28 PM

..and gnu said it faster & simpler than I

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John P
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 12:01 AM

None of which actually answers the question of why closed threads instead of banished trolls. I essentially agree that the people who make the site get to decide how it's run, but I also think that anyone who sets out to create a community has some responsibility to that community.

gnu, why the strongly negative response to me asking some questions? Why made you think I am being disrespectful of the owner of this site? If the only rule is no personal attacks, why isn't it followed more uniformly? I've left here twice for extended periods because I got sick of trying to have conversations with people that behave boorishly. Remember, I would like to see more active moderation here. I really DON'T think that anything goes on an internet forum or anywhere else. I'd be willing to pay money to be on a site like this so we could pay people to shut up the bullies and trolls. Well, I know that a paid Mudcat wouldn't be the same thing at all, but a more polite and respectful Mudcat would be great.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 12:38 AM

Well, John,

The trolls just come back as somebody else, so banishing doesn't work at all. Usually, if it's just one person causing the problem, the moderators will try to control that person. But when it's a general conflagration, it's worthless to try to sort things out and decide who's right and who's wrong. Better to close the thread and let people make a new start. But yeah, when a thread gets out of hand, the best thing to do is just close it, without explanation. It's fairly obvious to most people what the problem was.

And if you're "trying to have conversations with people that behave boorishly," you're in the wrong - you're feeding trolls. You're better off not conversing with them at all. You're not going to change them.

If you wish to discuss this further, I suggest you do it privately.

-Joe, no longer involved in "disciplinary" moderation, and happily so-

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Musket
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 04:08 AM

Ah, separated b y a common language.

Methinks some (Max for one) on the other side of the pond mistake British taking the piss for real aggression sometimes.

Each and every time I am in the pub with mates, winding each other up and having a laugh, we would be called trolls by some on this forum if you transcribed the words.

Whilst there are people who seek to destroy debate for argument's sake and love the power they perceive in spoiling others' day for them, banter and love of outrage can be part of the tapestry, as our burned out hippy friends would say.

Lighten up, because every time someone accuses someone else of being a troll, it is usually because they plain disagree.

Troll [noun] An excuse to police and belittle others.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 04:14 AM

Ah John, you mistake this site for a democracy.
Bear in mind it's run from a country where money takes the place of political acumen.
So the usual rules don't apply.
It sometimes seems that those who were here first have more rights than the latecomers, especially when the latecomer isn't American.
However, being there first didn't work for the Native Americans did it?
So there's hope for you yet ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 04:24 AM

It reminds me of a school playground, if the ball owner doesn't make the team, he takes his ball and goes home. No ball, no game. No opposing opinions, no debate.

Max is a sound guy, laid back and easy going, I was in contact with him through email some time back regarding an issue with the site, he was unaware of the extent of the number of posts that were being deleted.

Sometimes putting power in the hands of certain little people makes a mockery of democracy and freedom of speech.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John P
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 07:18 AM

I have not suggested this site is or should be a democracy. That would be a god-awful mess. I was suggesting a conversation.

Joe, I must have expressed myself poorly. I was talking about being in a conversation that has been invaded by trolls, not having a conversation with trolls. And sometimes they don't make themselves obvious until one is already engaged in the conversation. I know I engage with more often than I should, but sometimes it becomes difficult to have the conversation around them.

I generally don't like "talk about this privately" solutions to public problems, but if that's the way it is, I'll shut up and deal with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 07:23 AM

Gnu,

When there ARE attacks, and the elves allow attacks BY those they agree with, and delete any response or defense, AND any discussion of those deletions, by those they disagree with, the fairness of the deletions is called into question.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Newport Boy
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 07:47 AM

Mudcat is not a democracy, and "freedom of speech" should mean freedom to express an opinion on a topic, not freedom to abuse others. I like it the way it is, and I deal with the problems using my own rules:

1. If anyone abuses me, I don't reply. If the same person does it more than once, I no longer read their posts.

2. If a thread descends into abuse, I no longer open it.

3. I rarely post on religious or political topics - both are likely to generate more heat than light. (I have strong opinions on both subjects, but I can argue politics elsewhere, and religion is not arguable.)

Phil

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Rapparee
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 08:17 AM

With freedom comes responsibility. It's the flip side of the coin.

The solution is simple: have everyone act responsibly. Good luck with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 08:25 AM

I see both wilful blindness and material that should not be here on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 09:05 AM

Don't wory Richard, it will soon be closed

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 09:11 AM

" But yeah, when a thread gets out of hand, the best thing to do is just close it, without explanation. It's fairly obvious to most people what the problem was."


Joe, here is the ENTIRE thread that I posted and saw REMOVED, not just closed.

"Subject: BS: Moderator supports attacks on minorities
From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 03 Apr 12 - 11:00 AM

The Mod. has been deleting postings when minority opinion members try to defend themselves from attacks. This has been repeated, and is UNFAIR.

The original attacks are left posted, WITH NO INDICATION that they have been replied to. IF WE CANNOT DEFEND OURSELVES against such attacks, we should just shut down the entire site."




This was after a number of posts of mine defending myself against Greg F postings had been removed , WHILE THE ORIGINAL ATTACKS ON ME WERE LEFT IN. If we cannot defend ourselves against lies and attacks, and cannot even let others know we have been removed, what i the point of pretending Mudcat is capable of having a discussion? Why not just let the Mods tell us what opinions to have, to be "acceptable" ?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 10:32 AM

The rule about no personal attacks is often ignored. The rule that certain political parties must never be mentioned is always applied. I am not complaining about it. Just pointing out what happens in reality.

I also agree that the treads should just be closed when they become too difficult to moderate.

My 2-penn'urth.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 10:51 AM

Max is a benevolent dictator, Mudcat is not a democracy.

Fact; end of....

Mudcat life goes on business as usual; behave well and cross oceanic and cultural friendships grow and flourish.

Fair enough, we're all mostly adult enough to accept these fundamental ground rules and conditions.

But there always remains one main issue stemming from this benign totalitarian status quo,
that results in occasional member discontent and public protest.

That is the secretive anonymous nature of the 'mod/clone' close-ranks inner elite club.

There have been too many instances of deletions by occasional apparently 'rogue' mods
that seem to members to be unfair, arbitrary, biased, patronising, and downright arrogant & provocative.

We may not have any right to know the identity and 'behind closed doors' methods and reasons of mod behaviour
and internal disciplinary procedures;
but we do need reassurance that any appointed mods are not to be tolerated abusing their privileged positions & power.
to the extent that they would have been well suited thriving as corrupt Stasi Cheifs.

It is this that seriously annoys and inflames, and often causes 'difficult' but acceptable within reason threads
to spiral angrily out of control.

Bad mods spoil the system and undermine our confidence in all the other decent hard working 'firm but fair' mods we respect for maintaining Mudcat as a forum of first choice for many hundreds of regular visitors.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 11:07 AM

Bear in mind that 'personal attacks' are like rain.... there are light sprinkles where no one bothers to even open an umbrella or go under shelter, and some people continue about their business with equinimity, even when it gets pretty damp. Others cannot stand the idea of a few drops.

The whole process is a continuum.... there is no simple & obvious line/place where 'bantering' and reasonable disagreement become contentious arguing with insults and major personal attacks... but we all know when it has become such.

Some cannot seem to express difference of opinion without their hackles rising and becoming *personally* offended...and offensive. This place has many different personalities and opinions about not only what 'facts' and 'truth' are, but about what is fair in offering those opinions.

When threads that become more heat than light are allowed to continue, those --on either side-- who refuse to 'cool it' or back down soon decide "anything goes". WE HAVE BEEN THERE! It was not nice...or fun.

I, personally, would like to have the freedom to debate serious topics... it helps ME organize my thoughts. Many of you know I am not shy about expressing reasoned opinions on many topics... but if you look back for 10-12 years, you are unlikely to find me calling anyone stupid or hateful ....or being called such! I know personally a number of people with whom I disagree on some issues... and I try to keep the online debate to a level that would not prevent me from being uncomfortable meeting those people at a party.

I don't know what else to say to those who want **the threads left open and no deletions**, but who cannot debate in a manner that makes this possible.

"Know Thyself"
      Socrates

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bert
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 11:29 AM

Joe, you say,
...Usually, if it's just one person causing the problem, the moderators will try to control that person...

Unfortunately, when posts are deleted without explanation, then it becomes impossible for members to tell whether or not it is the Moderator who is causing the problem.

It also makes it impossible to follow the thread when somebody responds to a post which is later deleted.

You also say,

...It's fairly obvious to most people what the problem was...

How can it be obvious to anyone, if the post was deleted and we don't even know that the post was there in the first place.

I know that the place is not a democracy and that what Max says, goes; but it is a discussion forum after all, and we should be free to
be able to discuss things and state our opinions, without arbitrary deletions.

---

I was talking about thread closures, Bert - the stated subject of this thread. Closed threads remain visible to all.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 11:38 AM

Bert... reading your points tells me exactly why threads ARE closed. I can't see how we can (or dare) make public certain things.

"...it becomes impossible for members to tell whether or not it is the Moderator who is causing the problem."

Do you really want THAT to become part OF the discussion?

"It also makes it impossible to follow the thread when somebody responds to a post which is later deleted."

Yep.. exactly... and thus, threads get closed when it isn't worth the trouble of 'explaining' what was in deletions.....and then arbitrating all the contentious complains as to why "my post was censored and not his"

Joe used to do a valiant job of TRYING to sort things out, and I wondered at how he stayed sane.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Megan L
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 11:40 AM

Of course if they did away with the BS section it would half the problem

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bert
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 11:55 AM

All it needs in most cases Bill is for a short note "message deleted because of a personal attack"

But when (as beardedbruce says) some personal attacks are left in and responses to them are deleted, it seems that some moderator or other may be getting out of line. This reflects on the integrity of all moderators.

I little bit of openness and honesty would go a long way to resolving these problems.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 12:12 PM

I know my views on certain subjects seem to attract flack from the narrow minded. Still it is an opinion, and I feel a valued one at that.

If someone posts against my comment, all well and good, that is their provocative, they are fully entitled to their opinion, if a moderator removes it, I feel they are denying members the opportunity of response or debate.

Calling people trolls is childish, if you disagree with a post, respond in a positive sense, don't stamp your and run crying to mother mod.

I admire and respect many members here, if I caused offense, please accept apologies here and now.

Go enjoy your Easter weekend

Keith

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bert
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 12:15 PM

Megan,

...Of course if they did away with the BS section it would half the problem...

It would also do away with the better half of the Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 12:15 PM

Sorry about the spelling error "provocative" sounds funny but wasn't meant to be.

Keith

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 12:20 PM

I appreciate that apology and if I have not offended you Blues, I must try harder...........


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 12:27 PM

Nice one Spaw, lol

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 12:37 PM

"religion is not arguable"

Now that is an assertion that invites argument...

We should value the way the Mudcat manages to steer its way between thre prevalant faults of most web forums I've come across - those being the ones that are so frightened of censorship that they turn rancid and the ones that are so frightened of chaos tat they freeze out any kind of real discussion.

It's possible here to have genuine discussions about serious matters on which there is real disagreement. That's pretty rare on the Internet, or indeed off it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 01:12 PM

Newport Boy/Phil's remarks are so sound, they bear repeating:


Mudcat is not a democracy, and "freedom of speech" should mean freedom to express an opinion on a topic, not freedom to abuse others. I like it the way it is, and I deal with the problems using my own rules:

1. If anyone abuses me, I don't reply. If the same person does it more than once, I no longer read their posts.

2. If a thread descends into abuse, I no longer open it.

3. I rarely post on religious or political topics - both are likely to generate more heat than light. (I have strong opinions on both subjects, but I can argue politics elsewhere, and religion is not arguable.)

There are some threads that when started (or strongly inhabited) by people who habitually fly off the handle or stalk others, I simply don't participate. I've noticed that some of the worst have burned out or moved on. Naming names might resurrect their interest or presence, so I won't do that, but the initials "MG" come to mind. . .

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 02:35 PM

there certainly appears to be a lot of childish abuse on some threads and i just dont bother to respond anymore to such individuals [usually!].often this is from people who are otherwise very intelligent.
some disagree agreeably and its nice to debate and offer opinions each to other in such respectful manner
pete..

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Crowhugger
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 02:37 PM

From time to time some of us mistake Mudcat for a cross between a democracy and a miracle. Then we learn, or are reminded, that it's simply Mudcat and that we don't get to make the rules. For some of us apparently that truly stings, and it has left some in denial, some angry and others wanting to bargain. I hope none of us have bothered with the depression stage and that all who wish to do so will move easily and quickly to acceptance. According to Wikipedia one is not required to go through all 5 stages. Since I'm not in least motivated to fight a losing battle for something I don't need, I'm choosing to jump right now straight into acceptance. That'll free up some time & energy to go make music, maybe learn a couple of new songs.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Crowhugger
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 02:39 PM

Oh my, I could proof read a little better couldn't I? "...something I don't need..." = a say in Mudcat rules.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 02:55 PM

I remember Mudcat mods getting their knickers in a twist about a certain poster. There was a general note went round the mods, to delete all posts by that person. Then not long afterwards there was another one to say, "DO NOT TOUCH ANY POSTS BY ******, AS THEY ARE NOW BEING DEALT WITH BY ONE NOMINATED MOD". I was one of those who found this poster a PITA. Then I looked at, and read their posts, and I found them to be witty, and cogent, and since then I have stood up for said poster, in fact I am a fan: now.
That was in the days when I was a mod, but sadly I didn't toe the line in that position, so I was ousted, by someone with more clout than me who said, in effect "It's either him or me"
In retrospect, he may have done me a favour, because I no longer get PM's asking me to delete, or alter posts, made in error, or in anger, and later regretted.
I only closed/deleted one thread, which was in such bad taste, that I would do it again, in similar circumstances.
I agree with the sentiment that deleted posts should have a note inserted in their place, saying why it has been removed. I also think that a mod when responding to a Mudcatter's plea to remove an offensive post, would read all the posts before it, and after, and delete them too, if they provoked, or added to,the offending post

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 03:02 PM

I am glad to see the word "democracy" coming up in many of the posts above. If something isn't a democracy, then what is it ?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 03:11 PM

Post by Ian Mather-

British taking a piss- Should be prosecuted for indecency in a public forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 03:21 PM

Bluesman, Max owns this site.

And it, like my living room, is not a democracy. If I invite—or allow—people to come into my living room, I rightly expect them to act in a civilized manner. If they don't, I reserve the right to ask them to leave, or if they don't leave when told to do so, to boot them off the front porch.

There is nothing wrong with lively debate. In fact, it can be highly educational IF one keeps one's brain in gear and actually considers the points that one's "adversary" is trying to make before simply dismissing what they're saying. The problem comes when some folks' stomachs get all knotted up if they don't get instant agreement (or surrender) and indulge in name-calling and personal abuse—which often includes deliberately misstating and mischaracterizing the other's position, then uses this mischaracterization to attack them and their position ("Straw-man fallacy"). This is practically guaranteed to make the other person angry—which, I'm quite sure, is the whole point of doing it. There are a couple of people here who do that a lot.

And then there are a few people here—usually unregistered and posting as GUEST,(whatever)—whose primary interest seems to be in being as obnoxious and insulting as they possibly can. As long as they are sitting safely in isolation behind their computer keyboards--and their anonymity—they seem to feel free to say things that, were they to say the same things to someone in the 3-D world, might very well result in their spitting out teeth.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 04:08 PM

When you can reasonably expect anybody in this world arriving in your living room, then your argument holds water.
Otherwise the comparison is invalid Don

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 04:12 PM

Exactly right Don... almost- Mudcat is not quite a living room, more a good, well run pub. Quite often people are intoxicated, creatively often, sad drunks or sometimes even nasty drunks at other times. Things are sometimes said which should not be, and the landlord is quite correct to object, and send a barman, waiter, curate or whatever to warn the offender. And to ask them to leave if too obnoxious.

The wise customer accepts the rebuke, shuts up and drinks up quietly. And when tempers have calmed, realises that the pub is a place of good cheer, witty conversation, and fair exchange between diverse minds. And rejoins the banter without bile, or decides he's had enough and goes home to sleep it off.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 04:32 PM

Don, if you or Max left your front door open with a sign above it, welcoming anyone in, it should come as no shock if one or two visitors express a different opinion to their host (s).

As I said earlier in the thread, Max is actually fine with the content of debate here, he expressed surprise at the number of deletions in the thread we discussed.

Being asked to leave the living room of your or Max's home is one thing if the debate get heated, getting kicked in the balls when the lights go off by moderators is something else.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 04:40 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From:beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 07:23 AM

Gnu,

When there ARE attacks, and the elves allow attacks BY those they agree with, and delete any response or defense, AND any discussion of those deletions, by those they disagree with, the fairness of the deletions is called into question.
********************************************************

TAKE IT UP WITH MAX. HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU HAVE TO BE AD-FUCKING-VISED? Stop whining and do the right thing.

Don't get me wrong. I ain't pissin on you... I'm just sayin, eh?

Bluesman... "Calling people trolls is childish, if you disagree with a post, respond in a positive sense, don't stamp your and run crying to mother mod."

*A* post? ONE post? No... it's post after post. It's a clearly calculated, slow, methodic progression in BAITING for one's jollies. Cyberspace bullying is simply what it is and I find it sickening.

I have never run crying to mother mod. I call the trolls "trolls" when they are rude and idiotic for their own twisted "fun". Trolls and just downright nasty assholes have been banned from this site in the past and they did it to themselves. Their posts still exist for all the world to read and be disgusted.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 04:56 PM

Bluesman, it's not a matter of getting bent out of shape "if the debate get heated," it's when people get nasty and start shouting base insults at each other. Then, the pub-keeper or the host has the right to tell them to either "cool it" or leave.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bert
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 07:14 PM

Then, the pub-keeper or the host has the right to tell them to either "cool it" or leave.

Right Don. But it wouldn't be cool for him to just delete them without warning or without giving them a reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 07:15 PM

If something isn't a democracy, then what is it?

Any number of things. Most things in our lives aren't "democraies". When Churchill said that democracy was the worst form of government, except for all the others he wasn't just making a joke. The fact that in public life we have to settle for putting up with the flaws of democracy doesn't mean we have to do the same in every other aspect pf our lives. Most aspects of our lives aren't forms of government, fortunately.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 07:49 PM

"... delete them without warning or without giving them a reason."

There is only one rule. Break the rule, pay the price. Ignorance of the rule, especially since it's the rule of society in general, is no excuse. The rule is well known herein. It may even be in the "newcomer's thread" which I read over ten years ago. Then again, I also read therein not to feed the trolls... guiltyyyy... as charged, more than once. I'm of Irish decent (sic) and sometimes restraint just ain't an option for me.

In any case, once again, ya can't fight city hall and city hall here is better than any other that I am aware of.

I too have been attacked illogically and for no good reason and those posts were not deleted... and *I* LIKE it. I have actually asked a mod at times to make sure such posts were NOT deleted. I did not want those posts deleted. I wanted them to remain for everyone to read and for them judge the posts for what they were... a condemnation of the poster. That is the ultimate "revenge" - allowing a troll or a nasty to impale themselves with their own words. Been there and done it many times over the years. Some of them left Mudcat for good of their own accord, slinking away in shame they brought upon themselves.

In any case, there is only one sherrif in town. If ya don't like a deputy, speak to the sherrif or be on the train at high noon. But, I'll yell ya pad'nah, them there deputies do the best they can so unless yer aim is deadly, listen for the train whistle.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John P
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 08:32 PM

Except for a very few sad examples, I have seen the mods consistently doing as well as can be done at a very difficult job. My admiration and thanks to everyone involved.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 06 Apr 12 - 08:40 PM

I'll second that, John P. "They" have messed up. I only know of one case in over ten years that was sad, but 99.9% of the time they do a good job and get very little credit for it. Heck... when they are doing a great job, nobody even knows it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Apr 12 - 12:55 PM

I'm of Irish decent (sic) and sometimes restraint just ain't an option for me.

The first part of that sentence has no relevance to the second part.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 07 Apr 12 - 01:15 PM

I would like the position of moderator here, any chance of consideration ?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 07 Apr 12 - 01:34 PM

Anything been deleted from this thread yet since last time I looked in here ???

It's a right pain in the arse saving threads for offline reading and posterity,
when there's the constant risk of over writing previous saves with up-to-the-minute arbitrary mod interference & butchery....

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 07 Apr 12 - 01:40 PM

No one has contacted me yet with a job offer ;(

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 07 Apr 12 - 02:42 PM

McGrath... it's a joke.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Apr 12 - 08:24 PM

True enough gnu - but it's the kind of joke too readily taken as true by a lot of people.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: catspaw49
Date: 07 Apr 12 - 09:23 PM

It appears to me that the most readily available answer to "Why closed threads" is why not?

Works for me anyway.......this is a website........opt for perspective.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John P
Date: 07 Apr 12 - 11:45 PM

Thank you, catspaw49. That does, indeed, sum it up adequately.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Apr 12 - 12:24 PM

That works for me too, Spaw.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 07:06 AM

Gnu,

The ONE time I requested that Greg F's post be deleted, I was told BY MAX

"Subject: RE: BS: Wall Street Protesters...
From: Max - PM
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:23 PM

...

And why would you want it removed? It so clearly shows what he is, so I feel like we should leave it as a warning for the next person that engages him. Truly, though, I would hope it would convince them NOT to engage him.
...."


I then posted that I would reply to Greg F's post with my opinion of him and the reason I thought that way. I stated I would only give those reasons WHEN HE ATTACKED ME first.


YET MY POSTS
That defend myself were deleted.
That stated that my defense had been deleted were deleted.
That asked for a discussion about the deletions was deleted.


AND THE ATTACKS ON ME BY Greg F were left in.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Wesley S
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 08:15 AM

Moral outrage duly noted.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 09:39 AM

A thread that is never opened cannot be closed.

So one can pre-empt any risk of thread closure by cleverly not starting the thread in the first place!

I've done this HUNDREDS of times!

And I've gotten away with it.

And no one has even noticed!!!

God, I'm a clever bastard... ;-D

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 09:42 AM

Poor, poor, pitiful me.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 09:45 AM

I'll second that. ;-D Your position is indeed lamentable. It will probably be made a case study in "Internet rage" (similar to road rage), and will be referred to as a cautionary tale by generations of future students of Internet etiquette.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 10:17 AM

"I've done this HUNDREDS of times!

And I've gotten away with it.

And no one has even noticed!!!"

HA! I've not started way more threads than YOU have not started!...and sometimes, I've not started 3-4 threads on the same topic in one day!

Piker!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 10:30 AM

Mudcat isn't a steel cage, but some folks treat it like it is. You don't have a right to rip the place apart wreaking retribution on somebody that pissed you off five months ago. I watch Celebrity Apprentice to see people acting that stupid, it doesn't need to have protected status here.

I don't think it's about anyone's "minority" opinions but that they can't stop re-hashing the same hateful stuff and going after individuals personally. There are loads of places on the web where you can go and smack each other silly in front of an appreciative audience. This isn't one of them. Most people don't want to watch crazy people fight.

...OK, so maybe that's not 100% true. I DO enjoy watching crazy people fight, but only until I can't stand the people involved and get sick of the 'blah-blah-blah'. It's easier when I can turn the show off. It's absolutely the best when (and if) I can laugh at them though.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 10:36 AM

As a member of 9 years, deleting and closing posts can be an irritation. What is somewhat annoying is, there is an inner circle on Mudcat who can say what they want, insult all they like and no one deletes their spew.

I imagine my learned friend may somewhat disagree.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 10:51 AM

True. But it's kind of like that everywhere, isn't it? Not that that makes it fair...but think about it. Every cultural and political group of human beings seems to behave in that fashion. The in-group think it's fine. Those not in the in-group feel left out.

I bet it was like that in the year 600 too...no matter what village you went to.

Bill D - So you think you outrank ME in not starting threads? Ha! That is a bold assertion on your part, sir. I once did NOT start 683 separate threads on 411 different subjects! And that was only in the space of one hour.

Match that, sucker!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 10:57 AM

Sadly enough, I believe Little Hawk. Fertile mind, he has. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 11:00 AM

Little Hawk, maybe YOU didn't start the threads, you got your other personalities to do it! Totally unfair.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 11:37 AM

BTW. Well done on letting this thread run. There has been a tendency for paranoia to set in any time anybody asks questions about Mudcat workings, and such threads have previously been jumped on with (and without) a grumpy comment or two, by Joe. Then closed!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 01:42 PM

Greg, Even you have ther right to your post- but as I have told you, it comes at a cost.


As long as Greg F. is allowed to post attacks, I will continue to post the reasons I think he is scum.

The following is from the thread where he proved just how much a scumbag he is:


"Subject: RE: BS: Wall Street Protesters...
From: Greg F. - PM
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:00 PM
...
Beardie is also the guy that, in the thread about cash only for second-hand goods, wanted us to know that the sponsor of the bill was a Dumb Ni--er.

Gimmie a break."

His justification for this lie?

Subject: RE: BS: Wall Street Protesters...
From: Greg F. - PM
Date: 10 Nov 11 - 02:31 PM

For Max and Beardie's benefit, from the archives:

Subject: RE: BS: Louisiana Makes It Illegal To Use Cash
From: pdq - PM
Date: 23 Oct 11 - 07:37 PM

Just for the record, the idiot behind this bill is a member of the Louisiana House of Representitives.

He is Black and a Democrat."


NOTE THIS WAS NOT EVEN MY POST, and that Greg F reads "He is Black and a Democrat." as "the sponsor of the bill was a Dumb Ni--er."

THAT is the person the Mod was supporting.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 02:10 PM

Bruce- get help. Please.

P.S.) You might also want to reference my post where I apologized for attributing the quote to you in error.

Or not.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 02:12 PM

Gteg,

I don't need help- you do.

Stop chasing after me and attacking me. IF you want to comment on the substance of my posts, feel free- to attack me is to prove you have already lost the debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: catspaw49
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 02:45 PM

Say Bruce....I wanted to mention that this is a thread asking "Why Closed Threads" and you are doing a fine job of demonstrating the reason!


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 02:48 PM

Perhaps it's a distinct advantage to hold the negatives of a senior moderator's secretly filmed late night party 'indiscretions'..?????

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 03:11 PM

bb... sounds like Max gave you the same advice I have repeated more than once.

When a troll or an asshole posts and announces to the world and bares their to the world, allow them to remain for everyone to read. Oh, you can defend tourself and others but you can't be nasty while doing it. Nor can you be seen to be baiting the troll... THAT is trolling.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 06:13 PM

Keep it up and you'll get deleted too.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 06:45 PM

Not if he's Spaw. Spaw claims to have a 25-incher. Or was it 35? Well, at any rate, so long that it's totally impractical, and that's why he's so bitter about it! ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 07:25 PM

Who bitter?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 07:36 PM

I heard it was the Weimaraner that did.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 07:52 PM

..and folks will forever more be left wondering why Little Hawk is randomly verbal riffing on penis length
in a thread legitimately discussing thread closures and deletions...????

oh well..

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bert
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 08:47 PM

If you knew Little Hawk you would know that everything he does is perfectly rational.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Dorothy Parshall
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 10:19 PM

This is intriguing. Partly because it falls into the same dumb back and forths that cause me to just quit. Children bickering mindlessly.

BUT i had the experience recently, on a very different group, of people getting their knickers in a knot over my postings and in the midst of what I considered such shear idiocy that my head was spinning, the dumbest of the lot referred to me as a troll. When she resorted to name calling, I knew for a certainty that she was not fit to be a pre-school teacher. I stopped posting but read the rest.

Someone said the thread should be closed. Why? because other people might get upset. Apparently, these alleged adults had pmed the head honcho wailing that I was behaving badly. I thought I was the one being attacked but it would never occur to me to go whining to the boss.

Now I need to write a blog on "what constitutes abuse" and hope the fools read it. A couple people pmed me in support.

On mudcat when things get, imo, dumb, I just don't bother anymore. This other was so shocking and so idiotic, I never realized how bad it was until the name calling. I can see how that could happen to someone here but - hey - just give it up. Or do men just have to keep on regardless - like the charge of the Light Brigade?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Songwronger
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 11:55 PM

I worked up a post the last time I was here, some response to someone, and when I went to click the post button, I saw that the thread was closed. Irritating.

I've had posts deleted. The last was when I was imitating "a ol' hillbilly" in the style of a resident jackass, and I guess my braying hit a nerve.

It does indeed seem that the people with their fingers on the delete button are thin-skinned.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:36 AM

To prove a point, one of tonight's [UK time] duty mods
has more than amply demonstrated gripes under discussion here,
even within this thread.

Though, latecomers will never know how or why
Little Hawk is indulging in seemingly irrelevant random 'penis gag' banter !!???

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 05:23 AM

This is the correct one:

Well now, this is really interesting, 'Hookey Wole' makes a comment that this is going on in the U.K, and they're checking out us, here.
Now before I go any further, imagine, for a moment, that my post is calm, as my general demeanor...and we're all in a room, chatting pleasantly......no hateful, intentions, and nobody driving an agenda...OK?..Calm....

Interesting to note also, is the discussion about 'personal attacks'...and 'trolls'...and bickering......So, let me shed a little light, on what has become a predictable....(oh so predictable)...progression, and just ask a couple of simple questions..(being as I'm only a 'guest' on here, I can be pretty objective of what I've seen...and been subjected to).

A 'troll' is someone who prowls around finding obnoxious things to say, and lures people into nasty, resentful nonsense, just to fuck with them, right?...(or close to).......and they use 'personal attacks', and veer off the topic of the thread, while they banter on with their hateful, resentful semi-literate diatribes. More often than not, backed up with facts(?)..some wish to discuss intelligently, with hopefully intelligent people, so they can exchange input...about a particular subject.....and Lord knows, maybe ideas are shared, and knowledge and intelligence grow...to the benefits of interested people..either regulars, or people just 'poppin' in'...And of course, 'trolls' with their personal attacks just give Mudcat (or any online forum) the appearance of a home for obnoxious morons...right?

Now that we've established that, I need to ask a couple of questions. You know what they say, "A well placed question can change a life."
(inside 'psych-speak').

Has anyone really noticed who is most vocal about 'trolls' and 'personal attacks'??...and what they say about it, and them('personal attacks')?
Valid point! So I need to ask those same people, "Would you classify calling someone a 'racist' or a 'bigot' a personal attack?.....or is it just an 'impersonal tactic'?...without regard for the feelings of who you accuse, when they may not even have a 'racists' or 'bigoted' bone in their body??? Is it personal or not? Has anyone on here regularly, maybe out of frustration used that tactic, when they have run out of info to support their position in a discussion, supportive to the 'side' they have taken?...in other words, when you run out of bullshit, have you just resorted to 'name-calling'??.....and steer the tread into meaningless drivel???.....Didn't we just say that's what the 'trolls' do???
Has anyone else noticed that the chief and most vociferous whiners, are the very same people who routinely use the words 'bigot' and 'racists' in accusatory language???...Yes!..the SAME ONES!!..and you can go back and check any time you want..it's all there.

Now, as to 'deleted threads', in conjunction with the previous.
This is the tactic:...Any number of opinionated half-wits get involved with a topic, on a controversial issue...he sees that he is in trouble of 'winning his point'(usually because he is wrong due to political indoctrination that he never checked out)...so, seeing he is in trouble, he contacts any number of vocal 'know nothings' to back him up....and they all proceed to gang-bang, and tag-team, the person who isn't convinced by ANY of their nonsense....the thread turns into a 'squabble-fest'...with of course, the usual 'idiot-trolls' screaming 'racist!' and 'bigot!'...the rest of the moronic posse chimes in....and NOTHING IS SHARED, that could have been....and that gives reason for one of the nit-wits to request the thread being shut down..ITS THERE, check it out for yourselves!!..matter of fact, all over the place!

On another thread, one of the morons posted my name, and tried to have it appear as if I was requesting closing the thread . ..and it was closed. When I saw that I post that I DID NOT put that up, and asked to have it removed. It was. Joe, or whomever, removed it. He knows from the IP address who it is. Same person who answered 'Delete it'...when asked how he'd handle a thread he didn't like....and a bunch of true stuff was deleted......including a post about Martin & Zimmerman, and a link to the story about how the 'news' media doctored the 911 call, and the divisions that resulted in it. For some lame-ass reason, some wannabe agitator didn't want YOU to know that this whole heated discussion had more to do with the fucked up media's political agenda, than reporting the news....and, by the way, I AM a recording engineer, and I've listened VERY!...VERY!! closely to the recordings of that call and, and there is NO WAY that it was done unintentionally!
Do you mean there are those in here, who's political orientation is so fucked-up that they would stubbornly promote a lie and suppress FACTS, just so they can feel 'important' to the 'cause'????..built on lies???....and shut people up who are speaking the truth...because for them to 'enjoy their sense of importance' they take it upon themselves to fuck you up, too??? ..and you want buy into it???...and can't see that for what it is???...and you want to promote bullshit, supported by sheer bullshit???? That get's you off???
Meanwhile, in the real world, somebody just coming through, sees this behavior.....and just writes off Mudcat for being a bunch of senile wannabes suffering from diaper rash from their 'Depends'....is that what you bring in here???

So, in closing, for now, there will be some who completely understand what I'm saying....and some jack-ass moron will pretend he didn't understand a bit of it, some will be pissed off for being exposed, but the only real or good thing that can come of it, is to resolve to make it better.....and try, if you can't 'win' your argument, at least consider that the guy you feel you need to call libelous names at, is probably smarter than you, on the subject, and shut your mouth for a few moments, and attempt to discipline yourself to actually learn something, or ask inquisitively more questions on it...as if you could actually be interested in something more than proving what stupid opinionated jerk sounds like when trolling!!!
Fair Enough???

Waving, and Smiling Calmly

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 05:34 AM

Excellent post GfS. Well said.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Musket
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 05:40 AM

Q.

Just noticed your post.

I said "taking the piss" not "taking a piss."

If you can't tell the difference, you shouldn't have won the war of independence before we taught you how to speak correctly (and make cheese.)

(Is that what you meant GfS?)

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 06:09 AM

Thank you, bluesman!!!

It would serve us well to have those recent posts of mine that were deleted, put back up, and let other discuss it rationally...and maybe get to the bottom of the root cause of the divisions...I mean, are the musicians who came from and through the '60's movements to be rendered neutered, by political ideologues, who still think Jerry Rubin, DIDN'T become a stockbroker, and was either wrong in the '60's, as he said...or wrong now...but some of you are still hung over, stuck with his bullshit??????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 06:23 AM

Ian Mather: "Just noticed your post.
I said "taking the piss" not "taking a piss."
If you can't tell the difference, you shouldn't have won the war of independence before we taught you how to speak correctly (and make cheese.) ...
(Is that what you meant GfS?)"


I believe I covered that in my last paragraph:


"So, in closing, for now, there will be some who completely understand what I'm saying....and some jack-ass moron will pretend he didn't understand a bit of it, some will be pissed off for being exposed, but the only real or good thing that can come of it, is to resolve to make it better...."

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 07:16 AM

"Do you mean there are those in here, who's political orientation is so fucked-up that they would stubbornly promote a lie and suppress FACTS, just so they can feel 'important' to the 'cause'????..built on lies???....and shut people up who are speaking the truth."


YES.



Spaw,

YOU state:
"Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: catspaw49 - PM
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 02:45 PM

Say Bruce....I wanted to mention that this is a thread asking "Why Closed Threads" and you are doing a fine job of demonstrating the reason!


Spaw"

WHEN I POST GREG F's OWN POSTS, demonstrating his lies, and BLAME ME????

You really want to support the racist scum??

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 07:32 AM

If you post a comment disagreeing with any of the inner fraternity, the response you receive is guaranteed to contain either if not all of these words, fascist, racist, xenophobic, Hitler or troll.

Sad really, Displays a lack of debating skills.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Barb'ry
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 07:54 AM

I don't know about the inner fraternity - I don't post very often - but some posts have been racist, facist etc etc and others just 'generally offensive'! There seems to be a fine line between debate and just sniping and bitching, which then leads to 'he said, she said' and a general breakdown in the original thread and subsequent debate.

When a thread gets down to just 3 or 4 people repeating the same thing with personal attacks thrown in, maybe it is time to stop the thread and let the people involved email or pm it out between them?

There are always people in every online forum who get their jollies by throwing spanners in the works, provoking arguments and trying to score political points: it would be wonderful if they were instantly recognised and ignored - but that isn't going to happen.

As several people have said, maybe sticking to topic, stopping a minute to think before posting, definitely thinking twice before posting in a flip/ironic/taking the piss style (of which I have been guilty) and not having a knee jerk reaction to inflammatory posts might work - or not - but at least it might keep the debate/interesting part going.

Whichever way out, Mudcat is a fantastic place, a great resource and I'm really glad to be part of it - good bits and bad!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 08:05 AM

As I said before, if a thread get heated or abusive, it should be put on ice of 24 hours to allow posters to cool off. When it reopens, it should start with a polite request to keep it civil, if that fails, transfer it to the chat room and allow the gladiators and lions fight it to the death.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Megan L
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 08:09 AM

strange how many of the people arguing on this thread are men ah the joys of testosterone overdose.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 08:52 AM

It causes baldness, in both men and women.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 09:10 AM

Indeed it does, men of a certain age accept it, women rarely do.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Musket
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 10:28 AM

Absolutely, GfS. It was an earlier comment from Q addressed to me that I picked up on and then noticed that the post you just sent in summed it up completely. Thanks.

Rattling on about Americans not understanding English was of course my attempt to show how thread drift can lead to closed threads? Especially if you criticise the concept of spray on cheese....

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 10:33 AM

You think cheese from a can is bad? You who eat Marmite? Give Me A Break . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 10:51 AM

I'm sorry that the 'How big is your cock' thread was closed. For one reason only. When followed by 'Expert on marriage opens mouth' you score double points, in the Thread name Game ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Musket
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 10:57 AM

Don't get too many complaints, but thanks for enquiring.

Ian

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 11:05 AM

Didn't realise you're in the poultry business, Ian.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 11:11 AM

I don't believe that a civilised society should tolerate racism bigotry or fascism, or indeed, their supporters. Even the USA, the vanguard of "free speech", racial abuse is forbidden.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 11:39 AM

I agree Richard, sadly in the UK many sections of the community use it to their advantage in the most simple of incidents. I feel insulted when groups spat on the coffins of dead service men and women or burned Poppy wreaths on armistice day. But I don't have the privilege of taking a case, it is shut up and accept it mate.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 11:52 AM

I don't, either....but what does that have to do with this subject..unless you are attempting to cover YOUR ass, and justify YOUR inclinations to call people those things....even when they are NOT racists or bigots.

People who tend to LEAN to the left, are doing so, because in reality, they are sitting to the right! (and the reverse is true, as well).

People who want to keep steering things to the 'left's (or 'right's) 'talking points' tactics end up just going round in circles, going nowhere, and accomplishing NOTHING!......except being boring.

IF 'we' are so 'hip', why aren't we progressing? Seems to me, we just keep going over the same tactics over and over again, in circles...

...and by the way, I'm not seeing ANY evidence of racism on this thread...unless you include voting, (or not voting) for a candidate solely on the grounds of the color of his skin!!....and thinking, "Wow, we've come a long way........in circles"! Makes you wonder who the REAL racists are. Personally, I don't vote for people based on their skin color..nor do I vote for people who are talking out their ass!......because I'm NOT racist....and another,'BTW, I've played with more 'black' musicians than most of you have ever lived next to!!!

Sorry, Richard..your 'rap' doesn't hold up.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:32 PM

"BTW, I've played with more 'black' musicians than most of you have ever lived next to!!!"

I lived in Harlem. Ya might wanna revise that statement just a bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:32 PM

"People who tend to LEAN to the left, are doing so, because in reality, they are sitting to the right! (and the reverse is true, as well)."

Ummm... a new law of Nature has been discovered? Or perhaps a Freudian manifestation? (to go along with "Distrust all generalizations!")

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Megan L
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:42 PM

Hells teeth aw this leanin tae left or right at least in Orkney we jist hiv tae worry aboot leanin intae the wind no a bunch o hot air.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:42 PM

Ok, time for me to be serious for a moment...

You.. how would you feel; if you look over the latest new thread titles
and see one that is most probably a standard issue cheeky double entendre enticement to look within.
You ignore it.
A few hours later out of bored curiosity you give in and open the thread.
Turns out the title is not at all a saucy pun, as the subject is actual full on hardcore sex related.
Then you notice the name of the opening poster.
It is YOU, your name has been stolen and associated with a 'filthy' subject,
by whoever unknown, and for whatever malicious reason to discredit you in the eyes of the mudcat community.

Recovering from the shock & unpleasant surprise you request a mod
check the IP of the imposter and make a clear note that this thread
is a case of malicious Identity theft.
But not to delete the thread, instead leave it open
so mudcat members can be aware of what has happened and you are in fact an innocent victim of malicious ID Theft.

The mod complies positively to your wishes swiftly & effectively.

But shortly after the thread is deleted anyway despite your request
for it to remain open to clear your name.

From this moment on, because of inadequate & ineffectual mods handling of the affair,
any mudcatters who read the thread but not the clarification of ID theft,
will continue to think of you as the dirty beast who created a disgusting thread..

is that fair ?

These are the facts, ok I exaggerate the sense of shock & disgust,
but I'm sure that's how some of you more sensitive souls would feel
if it happened to you, and not me.

TO BE CONTINUED>>>

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 12:53 PM

But that thread wasn't just closed, it was deleted so from that point on, no one could read it.

A long time ago, Max came up with memberships because one person was using other posters' names. Any guest is suspect now, but especially those who are posting different from their usual M.O.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 01:01 PM

Y'know, sometimes life just ain't fair.

Past time to get over it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 01:05 PM

Well this thread was fairly sensible! I was even pleased to see it stay open and for people to make sensible/cogent comments.
Well that has all gone to pot hasn't it?
If you can't address the subject, or if you can't post without dissing another poster, I suggest you go play somewhere else.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 01:26 PM

CONTINUED >>>>>

I present this case study as a contextual evidence contribution to this threads debate.

I suspect some folk here would be quite upset if it happens to you.

Ok, now I'll talk about my individual take on the matter.
Personally, I can't help finding it hilarious that I've attracted my first ever internet stalker.
In all honesty, the 'dubious' thread title and content
was actually quite an accurate replication & pastiche of my writing style
and the kind of crap I might post when late night binge drinking.


But the serious principle still stands.
Yes Jeri "But that thread wasn't just closed, it was deleted so from that point on, no one could read it."
fair enough rationale for thread deletion.
But that strategy is not sufficient to address the problem of alerting those who had read the thread before deletion
that it was actually not 'you' who posted such 'filth' in the first place.
They will still continue to think of you as that dirty perv....

What if a malevolent ID imposter had perpetrated this outrage against a nice sweet respectable old church lady mudcat regular ????

For the record:

This is what I posted upon discovering the ID fraud:

"Subject: RE: BS: What size is your cock ?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 09 Apr 12 - 05:06 PM

Let it be known a malevolent ID thief has started this thread - childish fukwit !!!

Possibly a Yank judging by the piss poor choice of euphemisms.

Mods can check IPs to back me up.


I am British - We say 'knob' 'todger' 'prick' 'willy' 'hampton' etc

signed - "The Real Hookey Wole"


However, seeing as you've credited me with a full on 8 incher
I'll overlook your idiot deception
and not demand this thread be deleted.

Mods, please don't delete this thread.
Instead just append a note of this malicious ID fraud to the opening post."

TO BE CONTINUED>>>>>?????

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:00 PM

All you have to do is join GUEST,Hookey Wole.

It is easy and painless.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:17 PM

But I'm not just talking about 'me'.

'me' is the least important aspect of what I am discussing here.

I thought I make it abundantly clear that I don't take the 'me' very seriously at all.

It's the issues about mod/clone strategies and accountability that are
most pertinent to topic of debate in this specific thread..

isn't it ???

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:39 PM

But I'm not just talking about 'me'.

You just posted two longish complaints about something that happened to you. That is what I was responding to.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:44 PM

In a simplistic sense, yes it happened to 'me'...

The situation described is an example to illustrate a point of debate.

But the emphasis is on the 'what' happened, and by extension
the 'how' and 'why'...

and implicitly, how could it be handled better & more constructively in the future....?????

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Will Fly
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:51 PM

Good advice from KB in Iowa. Join the 'Cat properly and stop being a Guest. You won't get your good name "stolen" - and perhaps you won't get good people's backs up by writing stuff like:

childish fukwit !!!

Possibly a Yank judging by the piss poor choice of euphemisms.

Not very complimentary to our Mudcat friends, is it?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 02:57 PM

... ah... but in original context of a comedic thread....

We love having a frindly laugh with our yank mudcat mates.

But of course, you have to take my word for it as the thread no longer exists..

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Will Fly
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:02 PM

Must just be me - I detest the term "yank" as much as I detest the term "wop" or "dago" or "wog". I have good friends - all good people - in the US, and I wouldn't dream of referring to them as "yanks", even in jest.

Just my thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:06 PM

Fair enough Will, and repectfuly noted..

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:12 PM

Allow me to be first to say I don't give a shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:14 PM

But the emphasis is on the 'what' happened, and by extension
the 'how' and 'why'...

'What' happened you made quite clear.

'How' is pretty easily explained. You are a guest and anybody can post under your guest name.

'Why' is a bit trickier. Some people get their jollies doing things like this I suppose. I have never understood the thrill in that. That 'why' is probably a big part of the problem that leads to the type of behavior that gets threads closed. Some folks like to stir the pot just to see what floats up.

I don't mean to single you out by the way. It is just that you made a particular complaint that could be easliy remedied by joining.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:16 PM

999: maybe it's too much cheese in your diet and not enough fiber.

I see so many people who feel insulted by stupid things that I don't always notice when someone intends to insult me. "Yank" doesn't bother. If I call someone a "Brit" it's not meant as in insult either. "Limey" would either be a joke or so stupid it SHOULD be a joke.

Question: how many different guest names can one use before it would make the concept of someone "stealing" one of them silly?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:19 PM

Simple: thirty-seven.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:29 PM

"What if a malevolent ID imposter had perpetrated this outrage against a nice sweet respectable old church lady mudcat regular ????"

Christ you might have a job finding one around here. Any I have ever met in person could handle themselves better than most men I know.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:30 PM

"Question: how many different guest names can one use before it would make the concept of someone "stealing" one of them silly?"

Bingo !!!!

Now that reminds me of a related point expressed recently by a dubious frivolous chap going under the name of
"Old Boy"

"....But, yes, my latest new mudcat name for this weekend is a hastily concocted daft jokey sounding ID
that is here consistent thread specific..
Obviously I couldn't be bothered thinking up a new one for anywhere else I've posted in the past 3 days.
Next weekend I'll probably be just as bored & restless and reinvent as a new someone else for all our 'mutual amusement'.
Or might even drag one of my comfortable familar old personas out the 'dressing up' costume box.
Fear not good folks, I always try to abide by a personal rule of only being one persona at a time,
none of that multiple identity disorder malarkey
indulged in by some of you regular mischief making miscreants.

Happier now ?."

Something well worth expanding upon in this thread as soon as I find time to work it into a sensible relevant contribution

TOO BE CONTINUED >>>>

Hookey Wole, you have to understand that you are conducting a conversation in this thread with the person who set up that bogus thread in your name. There is a lot of "between the lines" stuff in this conversation. Since you are a guest and not a member you can't receive Personal Messages from another member or from one of the moderators who might answer your well-founded and thought-out queries about the incident. The fact that two different moderating actions took place on the "cock" thread simply means more information became available. It has been suggested that you ask to join Mudcat and all will become clear. I suggest you follow that good advice.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:48 PM

HW, or PFR, or T, it seems you think everybody is doing what you do, and they aren't. And the consistent identity isn't limited to one thread. Most folks stick to one name.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:55 PM

"T" ????????

'We' all know you got sophisticated space age secret agent IP tracking and posting behaviour analysis gizmos..

but who the F is "T" !!!!!????????.



Like I said, a sensible post from 'me'is due soon as I find time to concentrate on the matter....

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 03:56 PM

Hookey Wole and his eight incher.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 04:13 PM

Well, I've had a post deleted, already......care to explain that??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 04:14 PM

I can't help but think Star Wars fans might be disgusted with you linking to a site about Wookie holes!

(Actually, wouldn't that make a cool name to call someone? "Why, you're such a jerk, such a sausage, such a wookie hole!") Of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with our Hookie Wole who has completely different initials (most of the time).

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 04:17 PM

'It's the issues about mod/clone strategies and accountability that are most pertinent to topic of debate in this specific thread..

isn't it ???

No...Mudcat has been thru all this before. We will always have trolls and frauds who try to stir things up. THAT is the issue "it is about".

If people resort to that, causing confusion & consternation, what the mods have to do to even attempt to ease the effect is merely a side issue. There is **NO* way to edit or not-edit contentious threads that will satisfy everyone. Some (look above) want to just keep bickering...'defending' themselves... asserting that any editing or censoring is to be avoided. Others want any name calling or naughty language or 'offensive' remarks deleted...or edited... or.... whatever.

I can't see how there is any choice except "doing the best they can".... with very few 'explanations', as explanations just provide another topic to bicker over.

It IS obvious that UK members *often* have a different 'pain threshhold' and attitude toward disputes than 'local' mods....but *shrug*.

As to membership or not..... you pays yer money, you takes yer choice.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 05:46 PM

Sorry Bill but the issue is about moderation. We know it's a tough job. We know you can't please everyone. But at the end of the day everyone has the right to complain. If the person making these tough decisions cannot stand a bit of criticism when someone else believes they have got it wrong, they are in the wrong job!

I agree wholeheartedly that the mods should not be subject to abuse but if, for instance, someone was to delete a post of mine which I felt was relevant or pertinent to a debate, for no GOOD reason, then I would feel hard done by and would voice that opinion. I would not abuse the mod, call their parentage into question or any such nonsense but I would ask for an explanation. If no explanation was forthcoming then I would assume that the management have reserved their right to unilateral censorship. Fair enough. It would say a lot more about them than about me so I would have no further need to comment.

Unless, of course, my complaint was deleted as well :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 05:54 PM

"If no explanation was forthcoming then I would assume that the management have reserved their right to unilateral censorship."

You got it in one.

And that's the way it should be. We're all guests in his home.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 06:30 PM

We HAD a system where official complaints could be sent directly to head moderator,,,by PM or email. Ask Joe how that worked...and how much time he spent trying to sort it out.

"But at the end of the day everyone has the right to complain."

...and 'management' has the right to decide how - or whether - to deal with complaints. In a forum this large with as many issues as there are (3-4 going on right now?) I cannot see how any unpaid person ...or small group.... could keep up with individual replies when, as I said it would often lead to meta-complaints about handling of complaints.

When I was in high school, our American History teacher entertained almost an hour of bickering opinions about how tests, grading, class participation, etc... should be conducted.
Next day he walked in, went to the board, and wrote on the board:

This class is run democratically!
       signed, King Harmon I

This place is 'almost' as democratic as that.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 07:12 PM

LOL, excellent, BillD. Both of your posts nail it.

I was on another site today and saw this when I posted as a named GUEST. I know we've talked about it before & it may never happen, BUT it does give one pause, esp. the first two paragraphs:

Thank you for submitting your post. Since you have not logged in or registered yet, you are considered a guest on the site.

All guests' posts are reviewed by our moderators and if found to be a violation of our Terms of Use, they may not be published at all.

Registration enables you to make new posts, reply to existing topics, get email notifications when your post gets replied or when you receive private message. By registering right away, the post you've just typed will be saved and posted under your registered username.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 08:29 PM

Max has said 'guests' will always be allowed.... but I'd be willing to see their comments held for review first....

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 10:40 PM

All this issue, for just an explanation?????

If the topic is, 'BS: Why closed threads?'...that, in itself, is asking for an 'explanation', as in, "why"..which is asking an 'explanation'...isn't it?...What else could it mean???

I gave a perfectly clear explanation, didn't I??...which I was even complimented on...and the issue is, now, that it hit 'too close to home', we all are having it demonstrated, right???..(or left)?...in front of you!....think of it as 'virtual drama'......but it came true...and still is, isn't it?

You think this is 'trolling'???? No,, it's at the heart of the topic, right?
Just stop, and think about it a moment....Don't you think this is 'normal' forum and 'blog-o-sphere' interaction???

So what is it?? We can only think 'so far'??....and not anymore than 'allowed'?.....I've got a better idea, why not hear what the parameters are in regards what is the ultimate thing that you want, and What we must know...and no further....tell us a bedtime story, we can all sing Kumbayah....be provided cookies and milk......OH, can you tuck us in, too???

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 10:52 PM

Bill, if that means we have to read all of Little Hawk's splinter personalities' posts, no thanks. We'd need to have our own splinter personalities, and I don't think Max wants 73 moderators, even if they ARE only four or five people.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:02 AM

Hey, you can trust my "splinter personalities". They're basically just created for fun, although I will admit that Chongo Chimp serves as a very useful foil for various forms of serious political satire which poke fun at the rest of us for our all-too-human foibles and weaknesses. In that respect, he's like a character in a political cartoon in the paper. Still, he always acts as Chongo would, given the situation...and it's usually quite different from how I would behave.

As for the rest of them, they're all true to themselves. I don't consider them to be splinter personalities of me. They are creatures of the imagination, just like all the characters, say, that Conan Doyle came up with in the Sherlock Holmes tales and all the other stuff he wrote...or like the characters Walt Kelly came up with in the comic "Pogo". Most of them are fairly extreme personalities. They exist not to show a hidden side of the author, but to instead demonstrate a human extreme of some kind for its own amusing sake.

Penelope Rutledge, for example, is extremely wealthy, arrogant, quite full of herself, imbued with an extraordinary sense of entitlement and grandeur, yet she does possess the admirable qualities of idealism, courage, forthrightness, and indomitable determination, the latter being qualities any sensible human being would aspire to. As such, she is flawed, but she does have a certain charm, I think.

Shane is your bottom of the barrel, shiftless, all-Canadian local loser and irresponsible layabout and lawbreaker...yet he is shielded from facing his truly wretched condition by a childlike innocence which causes him to think he's incredibly cool and desirable. Such people do exist, and I've seen them in action. They usually end up very badly! But Shane (like Sherlock Holmes) is protected from that by virtue of the fact that he exists in a fictional story that has to go on to the next chapter. Shane is the last word in his particular archetype. Doug and Bob McKenzie really tried along that same line, but they'll never equal Shane McBrice for sheer incredible hoserhood!

And so on...

They're not fragments or splinters of me...they are archetypes of various exaggerated forms of human behaviour and personality that we see around us, each one taken to its final ridiculous extreme. That is the essence of most humour, is it not? When characters in a story go to ridiculous extremes, that's when things get funny, scary or interesting. If they don't go to some kind of extreme, it's going to be a pretty boring tale.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:06 AM

They're like all of the archetypical characters Miss Marple references in the village when she solves murders. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Janie
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:10 AM

*sigh*

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:24 AM

When I was a youngster, I very much wanted to create comic book style stories...and I did create some, complete with the art, but I didn't pursue that career in adulthood. At any rate, those stories were full of many characters, naturally, all with their own strange quirks and behaviours. I've basically been using Mudcat to do the same sort of thing in the last 10 years or so, merely because it's something I find amusing to do in my spare time, and I still have an affection for making up characters and stories about them.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: michaelr
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:35 AM

And I say amen, kudos and good on you, eh? You are one of the sanest, most enlightened posters on this forum. I mean that sincerely.

Cheers,

Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:44 AM

I'm just sitting here having a few shots of Jack Daniel's Tennessee Honey liqueur and enjoying the shit out of this. Marvellous stuff altogether! Seriously... from both sides... Keep it up!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 01:06 AM

Thanks, Michael. I really appreciate your positive comments. And you too, Seamus.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: katlaughing
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 02:00 AM

I agree with Michael, LH, though I don't read all of it.:-;

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 02:52 AM

OH!..I get it!...As long as we never get to the bottom of anything ...this must be the center of nothing!

Dang!..I had hopes....or was that change???

Same ol' stuff......

Regards,....and, at least we know...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Megan L
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 03:07 AM

WHAT!!! Shane doesnt exist? jings crivens and help ma boab ahd better tell Granny she wis fixin tae pay him a wee visit.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 03:41 AM

I never saw the thread many of you speak about. I can't help but think Hookey Wole doth protest too much, methinks.

He seems to insist so passionately about it not being true, that people may well suspect the opposite of what he is saying.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 04:23 AM

Identity pic of Hookey.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 09:28 AM

"From: GUEST
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 03:41 AM
I never saw the thread many of you speak about. I can't help but think Hookey Wole doth protest too much, methinks.
He seems to insist so passionately about it not being true, that people may well suspect the opposite of what he is saying."

I got as far as the 'doth' & 'methinks' then you completely lost me.. what ????

I can't remember the last time I ever did 'passion'
[well actually I can, but it was 20 years ago and what the wife never knows....]

and the rest don't make any sense to me at all.. what "not being true"...???

Could you please rewrite your snide attempt at abuse in coherent modern plain 21st Century English.
Then at least I can have a clear understanding of what it is you want me to respond to and why...

whoever you are.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Barb'ry
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 09:42 AM

Since GfS post at 10.40 on 12th, there has only been one post on topic. I'm not saying the posts haven't been amusing (actually...) but IF we are going to try to work out why posts are being closed, they aren't actually helping, chaps.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 09:55 AM

Hi Barb'ry, thanks.. the more constructive rational posts like yours, the better this place would be..

Unfortunately, as far back as I can remember,

[and certainly as most exemplified by the shameful period of "The Clone Wars"
and the public lynching of Shambles - yes, let's not go there again..]

threads on this subject always attract disruptive posters intent on derailing any serious debate & negotiated conclusion.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 10:40 AM

"... negotiated conclusion."??

Between who & whom?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Barb'ry
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 11:02 AM

You're right, Bill, but maybe we could lay out why threads are closed - or at least some of the reasons.

Apart from personal attacks and various 'isms' it seems to me (and I'm usually wrong)) that someone posts an amusingly ironic/flip comment, which may or may not have a hidden slight, the recipient has an instant, knee jerk reaction, fires off something unpleasant, others jump on board and lo and behold, a slanging match ensues.

The mod is then left to sort out the pieces of hurt feelings, snubs, accusations etc. Yes, it could be left - and perhaps in the case of deliberate nastiness, could be used to show the 'awfulness' of the poster - but not all of us are happy for personal attacks etc to be left.

I dunno, each thread is different and each closure is for a different reason - pick one! Maybe mods can leave a message when things are getting a bit close to the wind... 'Oi, watch it' or something!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 11:13 AM

" "... negotiated conclusion."?? Between who & whom?"

errrmm... friendly intelligent open minded grown up folks;

- members, regular recognizable named guests, and appointed officials of mudcat community... ????


oh right.. yes.. I see the flaw now in that naive aspiration.....

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 11:36 AM

I understand that the job of a moderator is to control the quality of the content, but some moderators go too far. Some are simply just opinionated, they take your posts down if they happen to disagree with you on a matter, dislike you as a person and some just get a kick out of having power.

In sport the executive will often change the management when they are not preforming, the players are not always the ones to blame. Take note Max.

A film that comes to mind is, Little Caesar.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 11:51 AM

That's not true Bluesman. Posts have been reinstated by a senior mod, after they have been deleted by another mod.
If complaints are made to those in charge and they look into it, and find the mark has been overstepped. Then it is remedied, and the mod concerned is spoken to.
In view of what Joe said earlier I can not name names, but at one time, he was the final arbiter of all deletions, and their justifications.
So you can't attack clones/mods in an individual fashion, they too are responsible to higher authority.
This is why I think all mods should eithr be anonymous OR, operate under an assumed name for the purposes of moderating.
As has been said times without number, "If you have a problem, PM Max"
Then again, you aren't a member are you?
Which, without being nasty, makes me wonder what right you, or any other non member has to complain at all!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 11:52 AM

In essence, most of us accept and support the benevolent dictatorship structure of mudcat.
Our loyalty to this international community is real and sincere.

We dont need to be aware of all behind scenes internal workings, disciplinary actions,
or factions and powerplays between mods.

We'd just appreciate a genuine assurance
that mods constantly monitor & rectify each other for instances of poor judgement and abuses of position...

and openly communicate with us with positivity and respect.

It's that simple really...

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 12:08 PM

Well you have that assurance.
Communications if any would be by means of a PM!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 01:13 PM

"without being nasty, makes me wonder what right you, or any other non member has to complain at all" John, I would never think of you as nasty, your comments are always fair and reasonable at all times.

John, I was once a member, the benefits were pm's from terminal bores who spoke to me like Jehovah's Witnesses and a message to my email account from the provider to say they had received a complaint from this forum, regarding content I was posting on the site.

Being a guest has more benefits, at least you have anonymity. In saying that, several members know me personally and we can converse through email.

Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 01:18 PM

Swings and roundabouts mate

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 01:39 PM

Barb'ry: "Since GfS post at 10.40 on 12th, there has only been one post on topic. I'm not saying the posts haven't been amusing (actually...) but IF we are going to try to work out why posts are being closed, they aren't actually helping, chaps."

Bluesman: "I understand that the job of a moderator is to control the quality of the content, but some moderators go too far. Some are simply just opinionated, they take your posts down if they happen to disagree with you on a matter, dislike you as a person and some just get a kick out of having power."

What you are both saying is absolutely TRUE!....Your clue is, in reality, this thread has been closed....just a different tactic.

As I said, "OH!..I get it!...As long as we never get to the bottom of anything ...this must be the center of nothing!
Dang!..I had hopes....or was that change???
Same ol' stuff..."

Nobody wants an answer, but rather to 'safeguard' a questionable opinion(?)....even if that 'opinion' incorporates deception, and, matter of fact, is built on deception.....but, it's what they want people to subscribe to...even if it's bogus..they don't care, it's their identity.
...and SOME of you THOUGHT I was the anonymous 'Guest'!
...just not to the TRUTH!

In other words, we are either being told WHAT to think and express, not HOW to think and express...And Max should take note!

Regards,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 01:51 PM

Again, an excellent post GfS, No one could disagree with your astute observations. You have hit the nail firmly on the head.

You should actually copy it, it may well be vaporized within the hour.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 01:57 PM

Don't you people have anything of importance or significandce to spend your time and energy on?

Pretty pitiful if debating the administration of a web site is the most important thing in your lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 02:10 PM

Very true Greg, and you seem to have the time to come and read it.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 02:10 PM

Well Greg, can't speak for anyone else,
but when I'm at home I fit in a few minutes mudcat time here and there,
spread out between cooking meals, doing music stuff, watching telly, and visits to the lav.. etc..

It's all about priorities.

How about you, seeing as you've posted to this specific thread 5 times already..??

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 02:27 PM

I can't speak to how anyone else feels about closed threads but I always feel embarrassed at having been a part of something that got so out of hand. We are presumably all adult here, all of an age that should dictate a certain insight into the interactions of human beings, but instead, it seems that the main thing we have learned in our maturity is to find the buttons and to push them with glee, if not malice.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 02:43 PM

I am not sure who is getting wound up, who is winding up and who is just full of wind...

It seems to me that everyone agrees. Everyone has the right to complain. The 'management' have the right to moderate. When someone sees 'immoderate moderation' they feel that it should be addressed in some way. What that some way is may be an issue but certainly one that we all agree is prely and simply Max's prerogative. We are now on page 4 and all, seemingly, avidly agreeing with each other as if we were arguing! Very strange.

The only recent point I disagree with is that 'everyone is off topic'. The topic is closed threads. Closed threads are one way of moderating discussions. Most of the above points have been about moderation. The two are inexorably linked and you cannot discuss why threads have been closed without introducing moderation.

Well, not IMO anyway.

Lets see how long we can all agree while making it seem like a war is going on :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 04:46 PM

One person's "immoderate moderation" may be someone else's "bloody well about time!"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 05:45 PM

Hence the 'quotes', Don. Moderation is as much a matter of opinion as anything else. Bringing us back to management having the right to moderate and others having the right to complain. Any disgreement about what constitutes good or bad 'refereeing' is almost as futile as who has the best voice!

I cannot state with any certainty what has been good or bad moderation. What I am certain about is that there are some decisions I have strongly disagreed with. I have complained about them and felt better for it. Whether it did any one else any good I have no idea. I have also agreed with some decisions and will do so publicly again.

Are we in agreement aboout that?

If so, can we go back to the 'living room' scenario. Yes, we are Max's guests. Yes we should, and in the main do, behave ourselves. But Max is just the same. He is generaly a good host. If someone tells him that they don't like his wallpaper he will not storm off in a hissyfit (Will you Max?). He may even repaint (Green is my favourite). If someone tells him that one of his friends is misbehaving he may or may not take notice. Depending on the circumstances he may or may not take action. He may even choose the right to complain about the complainant!

Moving on to the well run bar concept I can confirm that I have used the analogy myself. I have pointed out that if a number of obnoxious loudmouths take over a bar it quickly becomes a place that many people will not frequent. It will probably close down. There has been a number of such people here who have been shown the door. There are some who decided to stay. But I am thankful that the management have had the sense to tell them to put a sock in it or suffer the consequences and that, in the main, they are much quieter than before:-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 05:55 PM

Very true Greg, and you seem to have the time to come and read it.

Only for comic relief- and I was disappointed in that.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 06:02 PM

""It's the issues about mod/clone strategies and accountability that are
most pertinent to topic of debate in this specific thread..""

I sympathise with you as far as the stalking and impersonation goes Hookey, but cannot subscribe to your comments about Mod strategies and accountability.

They are accountable to Max, the owner of this site, and to nobody else. So, if there is something in their strategies which is wrong, it is Max who will say so.

Can you see that this kind of problem arises out of your (and others') disinclination to become members, for whatever reason.

The practical view of this is as follows:

1. This doesn't happen to members.
2. Mods, for that reason are spared the job of dealing with it for members.
3. Guests choose a path which leaves them open to this problem.
4. Mods are all volunteers who have lives outside of Mudcat and might justifiably state that they deal with these things in the way which causes them least inconvenience, solving the problem with a pragmatic rsponse.

Can you see where I'm going with this?

Do you feel that you should be privileged to impose extra work on members by refusing to become one yourself?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 07:38 PM

I don't think shifting the topic, is particularly answering the question of 'Why closed threads?'....all this, and now, through a little slight of hand people are wanting to talk about the 'mods'..pretty slick!...then someone becomes 'rude' and insults the 'mods'....and pisses people off. No need to get pissed at the mods. They are the ones who have closed the threads, they know why....and they know when they are requested to, and who is requesting it.
What might be illuminating, is when someone is requesting it, is it because they just can't handle people being 'nasty to each other' or because the one requesting it, is up against a wall of the fabricated bullshit that is being peeled away.
For Pete's sake, an open discussion is healthy, and so are controversial ones, and even ones that use 'colorful' language...ESPECIALLY, if it being done by people who write songs and write lyrics.......but something is out of joint here. Posts disappear that requires thinking..instead of 'parroting' a talking point...and when the parroted talking points fail simple logic, bye-bye posts. Somebody in control just don't like people thinking for themselves..No, no-no! You MAY NOT rise above political rhetoric.
You MUST remain in compliance with 'discussing' and debating, the issues that you are allowed to discuss...don't even THINK about approaching the area, in which the policies of 'political control' has little or no use!!

So, I'll leave you with a thought, which if you take the time, slowly, THINK about these lyrics, as applied today..in relationship to what we see..OK?...forget the frolic of the original tune....imagine Pete and where his head was at, when he wrote this..when there was NO music...just his thoughts. I think you'll find this VERY consistent with what NEEDS to be felt, today(that is if some 'political wing' doesn't try to lay claim, as the sentiment is on their side...so they are the only 'administrators' of it)...AND remember, when this song came out, how 'The Establishment' thought it was 'subversive'.....You think??: Read it slow...and think clearly....
...after all, this is a folk forum.....................isn't it?

SLOWLY!


If I had a hammer
I'd hammer in the morning
I'd hammer in the evening
All over this land
I'd hammer out danger
I'd hammer out a warning
I'd hammer out love between my brothers and my sisters
All over this land

If I had a bell
I'd ring it in the morning
I'd ring it in the evening
All over this land
I'd ring out danger
I'd ring out a warning
I'd ring out love between my brothers and my sisters
All over this land

If I had a song
I'd sing it in the morning
I'd sing it in the evening
All over this land
I'd sing out danger
I'd sing out a warning
I'd sing out love between my brothers and my sisters
All over this land

Well I've got a hammer
And I've got a bell
And I've got a song to sing
All over this land
It's the hammer of justice
It's the bell of freedom
It's the song about love between my brothers and my sisters
All over this land

Regards To ALL those Who Get IT...and who aren't pretending!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 08:31 PM

sorry, its late , the wife is drunk and I'm trying to put her to bed for her own safety and my sanity..

and I've no time yet to read the last 2 or 3 huge posts all the way through..

Don, mudcat as much as I love the fun of this community, its no where near a significant focus in my life..

stalkers and imposters, I assure you, are no more than a bit of a laugh..

if I have to lose a mudcat persona or 2.. no big deal

they are expendible.

I was , am, still a member..

ad hominem diversions & attacks be buggered

idividual identity is not the real issue..

Trust in the integrity of our mods is !!!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 08:47 PM

Am I the only person who actually reads and tries to understand every post in a thread that takes my interest..??

surely not ???

Ok, wife is now safely snoring in bed.

There are probably 3 or 4 folk here with genuine insight,
Would I be vain if I counted myself as 1 of them.

We know the games people play

the devious divide and rule strategies

even just the sheer thick headed loud mouth bully boy brawling for the sake of it distractions..


This thread could have concluded quite satisfactory
when Dave the gnome surmised:

"It seems to me that everyone agrees. Everyone has the right to complain. The 'management' have the right to moderate. When someone sees 'immoderate moderation' they feel that it should be addressed in some way. What that some way is may be an issue but certainly one that we all agree is prely and simply Max's prerogative. We are now on page 4 and all, seemingly, avidly agreeing with each other as if we were arguing! Very strange."

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 09:01 PM

"There are probably 3 or 4 folk here with genuine insight
Would I be vain if I counted myself as 1 of them."

in this specific thread only.

I'm never one for blowing my own trumpet,
and re reading that hastily written post
makes me cringe.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 10:02 PM

Oh! Yeah! You're the guy who doesn't know the difference between inches and centimeters.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 10:07 PM

Blimey it's late..

I truly haven't bothered measuring mine since my early 20s

But I know how to get the most accurate indisputable clinical measurement if I had to...

mudcat challenge - worth starting a new thread !!???

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 10:10 PM

I still think the best answer to "why closed threads" is why not. Case in point..................

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 11 Apr 12 - 10:18 PM

Dunno whats going on in my brain tonight
but just had a sudden flash back to my student days 3 decades ago

"Cultural hegemony is the philosophic and sociological theory, by the Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci, that a culturally diverse society can be dominated (ruled) by one social class, by manipulating the societal culture (beliefs, explanations, perceptions, values) so that its ruling-class worldview is imposed as the societal norm, which then is perceived as a universally valid ideology and status quo beneficial to all of society, whilst benefiting only the ruling class"
now where are my Gang of 4 CDs....

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 04:02 AM

OK, Hookey Wole , all I can do is tell you that "she" is another iteration of "you know who," a troll who has been plaguing this site for years. No onecan do anything about her. If they delete her messages, it goads her to post more. If they delete her membership, she'll post under another membership. No matter what they do, she can come up with a counter-move. The only thing that can frustrate her, is if we do not respond to her at all...and so I ask you to respond to her with silence instead of giving her the attention she craves. And no matter how distasteful she is, she does serve to express a hateful point of view that is present and increasingly popular in Europe - and in the United States.

I'm disgusted with all of you who get so bent out of shape about putative failure to control trolls here. Moderators really try hard to keep trolls under control, and I think they do a better job than a lot of commercial Websites - U.S. newspaper Websites, for example. We do find it's best to do it slowly and quietly and subtly - and with the cooperation of our regular posters. You people dumped all over Joe last year because you couldn't ignore a two-line troll message in the thread - and I'm sick of it. Hell, people threaten to take legal action because of failure to do thus-and-such. [I wonder how far you'd get in a lawsuit against a volunteer moderator.] I just can't understand why you people can't accept the fact that troll messages are part of being on the Internet. This is an imperfect world, and you can't expect every person in it to post according to your specifications. If she posts (under whatever name), leave her posts right where they are. If Mudcatters can't resist responding, then simply close the thread.

Now, if that's not good enough, contact Max directly and ask him to develop systems to keep "her" under control. I've contacted Max many times and suggested members-only posting in the non-music section, MAC tracking in addition to IP tracking, and verification of membership by issuing passwords by e-mail. However, that no amount of control is going to work perfectly; and every added control will limit the freedom we've all enjoyed here. But if you don't have what it takes to ignore our trolls, then contact Max and get after him to set up controls.

But before this lady, it was Martin Gibson who ran rampant here and feasted on the deliciously self-righteous indignation of Mudcatters. And before him, it was that woman from Minnesota. And no matter what controls Max institutes, there will be other trolls. Therefore, the best solution is to accept it that trolls are a fact of life on the Internet, and learn to ignore them.

---

For the record, this is an altered copy of a message I posted about a year ago, in May 2011. I did not post this anonymous message, and certain things have been changed that alter the meaning of my original post.
-Joe Offer, Mudcat Archivist-

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 04:43 AM

I'm interested in the systems approach. But really the reasons why threads are closed are generally pretty obvious if not always precise. There are exceptions.

Some more detailed assertions here seem however to be inconsistent with what is known and/or said elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 05:15 AM

Sounds like she's studied sociology

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 06:34 AM

"I'm disgusted with all of you who get so bent out of shape about putative failure to control trolls here."


And you are . . . ?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Megan L
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 07:08 AM

Why closed threads ?

Easy if ye leave them open the jumper unravels its no nice showin yer simmit in public.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 08:08 AM

Translations available on request!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 08:13 AM

Och to both Meg and John. I bet if ya wake up at 3:00 am ya talk just like Canadians.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 08:16 AM

Well, note the surname my friend.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 11:11 AM

Let's try this again....and it's not insulting to anyone..but been deleted twice...Why?

D-u-u-u-h!!.....

Why must people look OUTSIDE themselves, to know how to behave and work for the betterment of society, by somebody else's mindset?...especially when the path is laid with deception, and corruption?? Why not just tell the truth?...why not?...because, if you did, you FEAR, that, if you did, people might not really like the end result, of the agenda..Fair enough?

Think of it as a large monument, we have to climb, and the 'end result' pinnacle is the 'utopian dream'.....and to make it happen, you scale this difficult monument....BUT, that monument has lies, and deception, hidden agendas, crisscrossing everywhere for which you find yourselves making EXCUSES for....when REASON doesn't work out quite right???
When you get to the top, should you be surprised if the 'utopian prize of the capstone'....was made of anything else???

Love doesn't work, anymore???? Shouldn't we be spreading that...instead of trumped up 'knowledge' with bad science, to back up reasons to have whips cracking on backs...figuratively, ....or physically????......or mentally??....or emotionally??....or even spiritually?

All lasting change in culture, comes up from the streets. Music is a wonderful vehicle to convey that, being as it IS a language of it's own. Shit,even nursery rhymes and fairy tales have outlasted the governments that they were protesting about!....I bet you you can remember, say, "Humpty Dumpty', better than what King or country he ruled, that the 'nursery rhyme' was mocking and protesting....(now everyone is scrambling their search engines, to find out if 'that old hunch' was right)....but you didn't forget the rhyme!

Blues came up from the streets...Doo-wop...Jazz....Folk...B-Bop...and it finds a common denominator in people's soul.
They find 'release' in it...."WHY?"..(that pesky question, again)...release, why?....Because history has show us, through recorded time that REPRESSION NEVER WORKS...and never will last. Never has, never will.

...and 'Why'(?) should never have to be hidden.....unless, of course, one wants to remove your freedom of choosing your own path.
If it has 'Love' in it, what threat is it?

Thing is, a choice needs to be made.....Music or ideology?...Creativity, or 'talking point parrot speak'?
....and here, of all places, WHY, must differences of opinion get so hostile?....or intimidating to your identity??...and,with 'fear and loathing'???
Are WE ALL afraid, that our 'corner' of a bigger lie will be found out, and you'll be embarrassed?....or not Loved..or worthy of love...because you confused 'love' with 'attention'???...Frankly, I'd think "Far out!...Somebody is saying it..THANK YOU!!!"
You're more than welcome....you are not only my brothers and sister...you're my musical brothers and sisters......and you know damn well what I'm saying!
'Don't let your 'friend's' problems be an anchor to your mediocrity.'
How can people hear the cry up from the streets, if the passage is muted and blocked with the mindsets THEY GAVE you, to be controlled??...You can bitch, but if you have the need to bitch, we will instruct you on the topics, what you must agree on, and how far to take it..or question any alternative.....so you, and your insights can be contained. like the saying, "If I'd want your opinion, I'll give them to you!"
"We only want you to 'talk' about freedom, and freedom of thought..just not have it!"

..and Max??...Shit, I betcha when he pops on the computer, do you think his first question is "I wonder if everybody is properly stroking each other, and things are sweet and 'folksie'.." or "What is the click count?....Hmmm, pretty good, must have a 'hot topic'..Need to check with the advertisers"..........and that's OK! ..but somewhere a long the way, something was either taken for granted, or assumed that intelligent people were content with not wanting to take it further, and grow more.


Take it easy guys....OH, and why did you used to close threads?...after all, they don't HAVE to resonate with people, and threaten you....they are only words on a screen.............

Regards,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 03:11 PM

The writer was determined to publish a book and got a bite from a publishing house.

Before the writer finally got the message and desisted, THREE editors had jumped to their deaths.

:)

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 03:16 PM

The beatings will continue, until morale improves!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 04:19 PM

Guest posts are allowed now?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 04:24 PM

"Guest posts are allowed now?"

sorta...kinda....depending....

It ain't easy making a simple rule.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 04:41 PM

I really don't enjoy pointing out the fact that 99% of deleted posts and approx 90% of threads closures are actually from British catters.

The problems en't at our side of the pond.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 04:54 PM

Now that's trolling at it's finest. IGNORE!!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 06:23 PM

You betcha. Its obviously an anti-United Kingdom bias.

Gimmie shelter........

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 06:26 PM

99%?? 90%?? Such dedicated research

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 06:30 PM

Excuse me... are you closed? I was hoping to get a post on my way home to ease my travels.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 07:14 PM

If you're all so bright, maybe you can answer the question: "Why closed threads?"...No blaming, no name calling, no biases, just answer the question....don't spin it..just be honest.

....talking about 'trolls' diverting the thread...Jeez!

Still smiling and calm,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 08:02 PM

""If I had a hammer
I'd hammer in the morning
I'd hammer in the evening
All over this land
I'd hammer out danger
I'd hammer out a warning
I'd hammer out love between my brothers and my sisters
All over this land""

When all you have is a hammer Gone from Sanatorium, every problem looks like a nail.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: number 6
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 08:03 PM

all right !! .... Gimme Shelter

biLL ..;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: number 6
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 08:07 PM

whew !

That video

Man o man .... things haven't changed much in history and even here at the 'ol madcat.


biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: catspaw49
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 08:07 PM

Why closed threads? Like I said before, why not? It is the business of no one but Max. So why not? Go and play and catch butterflies or cockroaches or whatever. If you lose a post or a thread......so what? Now if Max came to your house and told you to shut the fuck up, then you could bitch! This is a website. Enjoy!   Or not.......


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: michaelr
Date: 12 Apr 12 - 08:10 PM

I'll limit myself to pointing out that if Max wanted to, he could block anyone, guest or member, from posting from any computer, no matter how many identities they create here.

Since he's not doing that, he must not want to, and he owes nobody an explanation.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 12:33 AM

Who's bitching?? The question was 'Why?'...that's all. Should it be all this ducking and weaving?
'Why' when something gets near resolving..but maybe not consistent with the per-conceived notions...slam! Why?..it doesn't need to. I'm surprise how long this one has stayed open, considering all the deleted posts....which is neither 'right' nor 'left'...just dealing with the human condition. dealing with love, verses co-coercion...and why should 'love' be a threat???
Makes ya' wanna' wonder what the 'real' gig is, huh?

Oh well, at least you have an idea that there is a game being played...and being honest is being feared.
Sounds like a spooky deal in 'upfront'.
That is so disappointing.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 01:09 AM

Guest from Sanity, if you don't even have the ambition to actually JOIN Mudcat, why are you standing here bellowing at the top of your lungs? You're not a member, no one can speak quietly and privately to you about all of your (now obnoxious) questions. You are the impediment to yourself.

There isn't a game being played - Max has an incredible amount of patience when it comes to free speech - and he has the idea that open discourse is important. But when these rants start others flaming, threads get closed. They reach an illogical end because of misbehavior. Like yours.

Give. It. A. Rest. Please. I don't read this kind of thread often, and you're the reason why.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 02:32 AM

Stilly River sage: "Guest from Sanity, if you don't even have the ambition to actually JOIN Mudcat, why are you standing here bellowing at the top of your lungs?"

You know, I already used that same 'argument' about 'illegal' aliens, or immigrants, to be politically correct...and the usual gang of bellowers argued how it was OK to come into our country, and breaking our laws to do it, and we should suck up to their demands....and you guys said I was all wrong....but now you take the opposite side....and this is ONLY a website/forum!!.... and unlike them, I'm NOT breaking any rules! What gives??
So by that rationale, you're being irrational!...or at best, a tad inconsistent!.....(now really)

Stilly River Sage: "Give. It. A. Rest. Please. I don't read this kind of thread often, and you're the reason why."

So, I'm good for the 'click-count' monetization??....Jeez, several people are like that....get all their knickers in a twist, like a Sumo wrestler...about my posts....that 'nobody reads'.
....I didn't join this thread till nearly a 100 posts...and it wouldn't have gone on so long, by all the drifting tactics....all you had to do was answer the question, within the first 5 posts.....or 10, or 100, or 150..or 200!..That ain't MY FAULT!..is it? I was just sticking to the topic, and had several great supportive posts deleted chasing the answer down...and did I ever jump anyone's shit about anything????
NO....just watching a bunch of guys fall all over themselves, with excuses, and tactics to condition people into thinking repression was acceptable, and freedom of speech was not...right??...Go back and look!....I'm not making anything up!

Now I guess I'd let it go by, but what do we have?....a bunch of 'folkers' who cut their teeth on protest songs, and the like....who are too discouraged to raise their voices, for good...AROUND FRIENDS?????

Truth is, if their is ever going to be a 'message' worth delivering, in music, even for 'social awareness', then why condition the artists, to choose a political message, that has holes in it, and eventually makes no one pay any attention, to us....and so easily dismissed and disregarded?

It's a good thing, that you have to read these things you don't readily agree with......a LOT of people out there, in America should do the same...it would do them right!

I remember the early days of Dylan, Ochs, McGuire....not great voices..but man, people LISTENED to the lyrics, as if they were glued to 'em!

....and just like them, I'm 'protesting' the 'establishment suppression' which as become the status quo, of bogus political, mind numbing rhetoric.................................and now, by golly, your reading ME!!!!

By the way, though there is a gap in understanding and agreement(sorta), Regards to you Regardless!!..(wink)

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 04:03 AM

michaelr, it isn't possible to block any one computer specifically. Some shared/cable internet connections assign random IP addresses from a bloc allocated to them. Thus banning by IP address isn't an exact science.
When I ran my own site, I found this to be the case. Then there's the anonymiser, where you can login via a third party.
However, the one insurmountable problem is this. You can change your IP address at will.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Megan L
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 04:05 AM

Hmmm there are folks around here remind me of this The question goes round and round

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 05:08 AM

If Max or Joe start hearing directly from registered members here, we can push them to finally do something to stop the good name of Mudcat dipping into this non-stop bickering.

It only takes 2 minutes to email Max, Jeri or Joe.

[e-mail] [e-mail]   [e-mail]

Time and again, as Mudcat members work together to campaign for a fairer, greener, more democratic website.

Some members/guests behaved appallingly. But some good could still come of it. This could be our chance to finally level the playing field and get moderators to answer the questions posed to them by EVERYONE, not just the inner ring on Mudcat that hug every thread while other get their posts deleted – let's work together to seize the opportunity !

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: TheSnail
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 06:06 AM

Hi GUEST. Don't you think using GUEST as your member name is a bit confusing? People might easily mistake you for an anonymous GUEST.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 06:20 AM

Of course what might be interesting would be for the IP addresses of the Guest posters to be published for us all to see. Along with the names of those registered Catters that may be, (or have been), associated with them.
Along with all the pseudenyms used for each one, not known by name.
I dare say that one IP address would account for at least 4 differently named posters in this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 10:17 AM

It would be better still to log MAC numbers.

I'm sure I have however read stuff that Max pointed to that supported the essential anonymity of the internet. I don't think that is right. People should be prepared to identify themselves and take "ownership" of their views.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 10:30 AM

Guest from Sanity, you just illustrated perfectly why your posts rub me the wrong way. Zero to sixty in a million directions that have nothing to do with what I said - your ranting is annoying. Okay, I don't read your posts because of that. How hard is that to understand? And if you aren't a member, no one can offer you the answers you want. Answering questions via Private Messages is a benefit to Mudcat Cafe members. It's that simple.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 10:39 AM

I'm not sure exactly what's been deleted in the time it's taken me to write this ?
So please treat this as a general comment rather than a response to a specific problematic personality....

I had'nt planned reposting to this thread as I guess I've said enough to try to make a constructive effective contribution.


But..

Pseudonames, nom de plumes, aka's, secret identities, fictional identities, etc..
as invented & used by artists & entertainers are diverse and a rich and glorious part of our shared cultural history.

"Luke the Drifter", "Ivor Biggun", "Buster Poindexter", "Purple Helmets", "The Dukes of Stratosphear"..

just a hint of the innumerable instances of artists stretching out beyond the confines of their more well known public personas.

Quite often an open secret as much as any genuine attempt to fool an audience
for whatever playful, fun, silly, creatively discrete, or commercial reason.

For the most part usually benign, non malevolent in intent.


Now in the case of mudcat ID imposters, the devious fraudster may be able to throw IP detection methods off the trail
via anonymisers, etc.

But the person being impersonated should still be verifiable by their regular pattern of geographical IP range,
even if connected by Dynamic IP.

I'm no techwizz expert, but am fairly sure of the parts of the UK I am more likely to be pinned down to.
Anywhere else would stick out very questionbly.

Right now google reckons I am located at "Bath, UK".
Wrong, but nearer say than Croydon or Loughborough, or anywhere over the Atlantic..

I've never made a secret of my daft name games.
Joe I'm sure, as well now as Jeri, have more than probably been aware
and kept an eye on my jokey ID activities all these years.

That they tolerate it, is testament to the good humour & better nature of mudcat authorities.

There is a place here for marginally dysfunctional undisciplined anti authoritarian minds like mine,
provided we are respectful of the greater community, and never deliberately malicious & destructive.

[ok maybe once or twice a year on birthday and new years drinking bender - sorry guys]


Now as for my recent and currently active forum stalker/ID imposter, who knows why or what you're up to..!!??

more to the point who cares.


Right now, clearing up the mess after the wife stepped in dogshit on the pavement outside our front door
is a far more irritating real hazard of modern social life.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 11:09 AM

Are 'Guests' supposed to supply the answers?..or guess at why the posts vaporize when a good question is asked??...or notice that the deletions and closures start touching the Achilles Heel inconsistency of 'political rhetoric' that has obvious contradictions in it? What is more important, being 'politically correct' or honest and accurate?
If the political shit is found NOT to hold up, to the truth, go for the truth, based on FACTS....instead of bellowing an error, long enough to adopt, and recruit more erroneous creatures, who seem to be a hybrid of lemmings and parrots! As long as we don't admit that there are some 'flaws' along the way, and don't correct them, including the abandonment of impotent notions, then we might as well write off any effectiveness, that we, as artists can bring to the social conscientiousness.
Shit, if we want everything to fit in a nice box, of 'political correctness'...we got the rest of eternity to fit in a box. How about bringing some TRUTH to the living?
...and by the way folks, I'm not just talking about 'liberals' either.

Right now this country is dividing all over the place, every segment of this society is being 'force fed' reasons to hate, and be at war with another segment. We are fractured...BY DESIGN.....and by design of the same people who are NOT recognized, by EITHER parties as the controllers of the national dialogue. In fact, they are the ones, throwing the topics and controversies out to the masses, so while the masses are 'arguing' and skirmishing back and forth, our eyes are off the real agenda, being played out....in which WE ALL lose!!
Is this STILL not apparent??....It becomes REALLY OBVIOUS, when we look honestly and objectively at their DEEDS, as opposed to listening to the rhetoric, and getting all whooped up.
Do you realize how monumental it is, that Mudcat Forum is broaching this subject???....in a time of national and cultural confusion???
No, folks, I ain't just stirring up 'trouble'....I'm talking to the very people who were there, knows what can happen, but have been anesthetized, and who are being 'brought to', out of their slumber.
WE, as folk singers, IF coupled with the TRUTH and FACTS, would be a force to be reckoned with!
Didn't we already prove that?......and now nobody is listening? What changed? Love for our fellow human beings have been replaced, by bureaucratic rhetoric and 'programs' aimed at controlling, not helping...while the debt of their profiteering has further enslaved, a once free and kick-ass people.
...and that's OK????
Well shut me up!

On YOUR SIDE!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 12:35 PM

What?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 12:46 PM

Richard... it's easy.... you read every 3rd word- backwards. Then imagine ee cummings reading it to improvised jazz.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 01:57 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?

Bill D: "Richard... it's easy.... you read every 3rd word- backwards. Then imagine ee cummings reading it to improvised jazz."

Richard Bridge: "What?"


From the bottom of a previous post.....:

From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Apr 12 - 05:23 AM


So, in closing, for now, there will be some who completely understand what I'm saying....and some jack-ass moron will pretend he didn't understand a bit of it, some will be pissed off for being exposed, but the only real or good thing that can come of it, is to resolve to make it better.....and try, if you can't 'win' your argument, at least consider that the guy you feel you need to call libelous names at, is probably smarter than you, on the subject, and shut your mouth for a few moments, and attempt to discipline yourself to actually learn something, or ask inquisitively more questions on it...as if you could actually be interested in something more than proving what stupid opinionated jerk sounds like when trolling!!!
Fair Enough???

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 02:19 PM

I am reminded forcibly of various meetings and seminars I have attended. I remember one where a police officer told us that one almost invariable component of a criminal's life is that s/he thinks s/he is smarter than her/his adversaries.

Not to say that this is a crime. But the component is there.

wink!

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 02:21 PM

It is an excellent post, this thread has been drifting a bit, this post by GfS brought it back on track, I see the negatives gathering again, clearly these individuals aren't capable of offering a solution.

Well said GfS.

Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 02:39 PM

It's obvious that Guest from Insanity has far too much time on its hands and nothing to say.

Don Firth

P. S. And I get the distinct impression that Guest from Insanity and Guest Hookey Wole are one and the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 02:41 PM

Troll, troll, troll along
Gently down the thread.
Merrily, merrily, merrily
The trolls are getting fed.

It's getting kinda silly. While speed reading recent posts, I caught a snippet of one post... ye wants a democratic Mudcat? Ere ye fookin serious? Give yer head a shake to see if it rattles! Lard tunderin Jaysus buddy. D'ye read em before ya submit em?

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 02:48 PM

Maybe GUEST,Bluesman as well. They all have the same bellicose attitude and consider themselves (itself?) to actually be in possession of a functioning brain cell.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 02:51 PM

Don, which Hookey Wole ?


The real one, me ?

The imposter, who ?

or perhaps neither ?


I say your "distinct impression" is wrong.

How do we know you are not actually "Guest from Insanity and Guest Hookey Wole" ?



P.S. I get the distinct impression that this place is rife with easily exploitable & manipulated resentments and paranoia.

As well as just plain ordinary lazy folks who don't bother carefully reading threads before pitching in...???

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 02:53 PM

Guest from Sanity gets on my nerves sometimes (and the *wink* thing is stupid), but I agree with what he said above. When you argue because you don't like somebody and don't care about WHAT they're saying, maybe it's time to be somewhere else. Just think about whether you're making things better or worse.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 02:55 PM

"Right now, clearing up the mess after the wife stepped in dogshit on the pavement outside our front door is a far more irritating real hazard of modern social life."

Calls for a block party, imo.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 02:57 PM

.. and bellicose.. me ???

I am sincerely hampered by a distinct genetic trait to try to seek, reason moderation and conciliation
in situations of ..errrmm.. over-dynamic social intercourse...

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: katlaughing
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 04:38 PM

What Catspaw said, two or three times, already, but I might also add there may be no need for the OP's original question if people considered the following:

from the Four Agreements - A Toltec Wisdom Book by don Miguel Ruiz:

1) Be Impeccable with your word

2) Don't take anything personally

3) Don't make assumptions

4) Always Do Your Best

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 05:02 PM

"...there will be some who completely understand what I'm saying....and some jack-ass moron will pretend he didn't understand a bit of it,..."

GfS----In college, I read GWF Hegel (German students prefer to read him in English tranalation).... but for that I got credit- and an 'A'.
I 'can' work thru posts with indefinite references, loose but extended metaphors, assertions with self-referential embedded assumptions...and implied existential truths- but it is too much work to sort out some expositions in the time alotted.

When I post HERE I try to be as clear & coherent as the situation will allow. I don't always succeed, but the intent is there. My bit of poking at your 'style' was simply a short attempt to avoid saying it ...ummm...like this.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: michaelr
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 06:31 PM

John McKenzie: thanks, I did not know that.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 07:15 PM

"Vigorous writing is concise. Omit needless words." - William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 07:21 PM

GfS: it's references like 'jackass moron' which seem to be applied to anyone who disagrees with you that get folks pissed off, that and the occasional lapse into "I have been telling you this stuff for years and it's still not getting through your thick heads." There are lots of people here who post things as they see those things, and many of them well-read.

I am as well read as you I think, and as we have discussed on a few occasions much in-line with your way of thinking. But, your somewhat lame and erroneous indictment of liberals gets on my crank because it's lame and erroneous. You use the word like it's a bad thing to be liberal. It isn't. (Nor is it necessarily bad to be conservative.)

This site belongs to Max, 100%. Has there always been agreement among the moderators? No. Will there ever be? I don't know. As for posts disappearing or threads, it happens. Years back I would have given a shit and did; now, I don't.

There are things than do not help: lack of a clear understanding of policy regarding Guest posts in BS is one. I figure they'll get to it in due course. Another is where to draw the line/define the 'limit' with regard to remarks about or to another poster. However, when that stuff gets decided and made clear then maybe lots of other stuff will fall in place and much of this thread will have been unnecessary.

As Bill pointed out earlier, it's difficult to make simple rules. Reminds me of an educator I know who got his school teachers to make a list of rules for their classrooms. Some came in with reams/stacks of paper, numbered. One teacher came in with a single sentence. "Be nice, please." The school went to single sentence rules: be nice, be polite, don't snore, and others in a similar vein. There was a reason for that: make a long list and someone will find a way around it. Make anything so prescriptive and it causes people to look for loopholes, and people will and do find them.

'Harsh' or inflammatory language comes in many forms: some is obsequious, some double entendre-d, some in the guise of politely worded sarcasm, some outright foolish remarks at best. It isn't a moderator's job to curb that. It's ours, all of us, and that includes moderators participating in the thread.

---

That's a perfect "10" of an answer, 999! --mudelf

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Jeri
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 07:49 PM

I agree with that moderator, who was not me. "Be nice" ought to do it. If people don't know what that entails, you've probably got worse problems than getting deleted here.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: katlaughing
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 08:02 PM

Ditto here, Jeri.

...While just the art of being kind
Is all the sad world needs.

- Ella Wheeler Wilcox -

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: catspaw49
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 09:00 PM

Isn't there just a bit of irony in that this thread about the terrible closed thread problem now has 238 posts?


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 09:00 PM

"Be nice, please."

Gee... where have I heard that rule before? Oh, yeah... way back in this thread... I think. Within the first 50 or so posts? No? And, seems to me, whoever posted to that effect said that's been the suggested approach for 12 years or more in this here Café???

I could be wrong. My memory sucks... or blows... I have a hard time to remember with all the sucking and blowing going on around here.

Recap... one rule... no personal attacks. Unwritten rule... you do not have a vote.

Seems pretty simple to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 09:53 PM

hmmmmm.. now let's think...

1] autocratic benevolent dictator,

2] secret unaccountable governing bureaucracy and law enforcement,

3] institutionalised monitoring & censorship of all public communications

4] citizens denouncing each other in public,

5] citizens furtively informing on each other to secret police in private

6] Gangs of thugs intimidating non conformist dissident citizens
[with or without tacit complicity of governing bureaucracy ???]

7] folk music and outdoor traditional culture celebrations & camping


hmmmmm.... sounds like a series of documentaries I watched on the "History Channel"..???


But.. y'know what, I'm actually ok with 1 & 2;

Being a pragmatist, I'm still open to persuasion on 3..

It's 4 & 5 & 6 that's the sour core of the rotting apple that leaves the worst taste
and stains the undergarments in any community...

7.... least said about 7 the better.

At least we don't have to wear uniforms, suffer food shortages,
and Mudcat has no nulear missiles... [does it...?????]

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 10:02 PM

"Be nice, please."

Mammy Yokum, Li'l Abner's mom, used to say "Good is better'n evil, 'cause it's nicer!"

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Janie
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 10:14 PM

Bruce, Jeri, mudelf, Kat, Bill D.

*smile*

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 10:59 PM

Amen, 999!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 11:05 PM

Hookey Wole... "hmmmmm.. now let's think... 1] autocratic benevolent dictator,..."

That's as far as I read before I said to myself, "What a fuckin arrogant asshole!"

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Hookey Wole
Date: 13 Apr 12 - 11:19 PM

Oh, well there goes the happy clappping new mood of niceness...


.. I'd say I'm more of a "fuckin perspicacious asshole!"

shame you never got as far as reading 4 through 5 & 6.....

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 02:54 AM

From Richard: "I don't believe that a civilised society should tolerate racism bigotry or fascism, or indeed, their supporters. Even the USA, the vanguard of "free speech", racial abuse is forbidden."


I fully agree.

It is the only reason why I rarely post here now, and then, only as a 'guest' for I refuse to belong to any community where this type of speech is tolerated. Sadly, it has been tolerated here for way too long, to the point where the person who does it now almost holds this site to ransom. If anyone dares to disagree with his foul posts and they are usually SO foul that they cannot be ignored (as well he knows) then the thread is usually closed very fast. Of course, he knows this will happen, which is why he behaves this way, laughing from the security of being hidden away behind his screen.

I have strong principles and I find it nigh on impossible not to tell foul-minded folk what I think of their racist, abusive behaviour.

It's very hard to run a site when you have a poster of this depth of nastiness. I do not know why he is permitted to still come to Mudcat. I think he has driven a lot of good people away. The gift of free speech, for me, does not entail the ABUSE of that gift.

And now, back to closed threads...........

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 03:13 AM

Man!..What a ride!! GREAT POSTS!!!

999, and Hookey. THAT'S What I mean, by changing the dialogue!!!

First of all, I don't have a 'Jones' or an axe to grind with 'liberals' any more than 'conservatives'. What pisses me off, is that BOTH of them, as a group of individual people, ALL wanting to do the best thing they can, WITH THE INFORMATION THEY GOT TO WORK WITH, have just been flat out deceived! Even with all the abundance of evidence, and a 'trail' that leads from where we were, to what this people has become now, happens to be the results of Politician/Financials/Media relationship...and all working for the 'elite' few. Example: Now, just bear with..It is a pretty well known and accepted fact, by pretty much everybody, that Glass-Steagall Act was a disaster, and paved the way for the financial/banking mess and large portions of the economy taking a massive dump! I want you to think back, if you were paying attention, at all back then, and remember the media package it was dressed up to be, and then the 'debate' of the 'advantages' of enacting that, and all the 'benefits' it would make possible, for all the 'loan benefits' for the 'struggling families, needing a hand up'. the 'Right', says Great for business! the 'Left' says "I don't know about those business guys..." Crooked Banker negotiates with party bosses, and now its sold to the 'Left' as a benevolent way to 'help' poorer people. Party boss, accepts deal, of 'inside trading' tips, because this thing is going to make him also, a wealthy man..with no connected money trail. Party boss, makes 'issue' (either pro or con) about why the party base should be 'concerned'. Debates, and enthusiasm anticipation grows...after all, 'we'(the party) are going to be the 'good guys' for once, and these 'loans' will be available...and we're getting something 'our'   way..OK?...Soon the 'legal' obstacles are out of the way, and it opens the doors for the crookedest pieces of crap on the planet to sell us a 'pyramid scheme' to defraud the entire tax structure, and economy, for a LONG way off...if, in fact, we recover, at all. Clinton backed and signed the bill. YET, if you are a Democrat, it either gets swept away, or reasoned away. Don't you think that before the plan was laid out, that the people who concocted the scam, spent maybe just a little time, figuring ways to get it through the 'legal' system, and how to sell the 'good idea' of it to the masses???
Bottom line: We were deceived...on purpose...for the sake of these crooks, to get money, a stepping stone to power. None of them prosecuted, no serious investigation resulting in much. Not much exposing them....no the party connections, on both sides....and we eat shit.
Now that's just one example. I picked an old one, but come on folks, they just keep doing it in front of our eyes, and both sides feverishly Debating THINKING THEY ARE RIGHT...because both sides, as far as us, the 'wee people', are comprised of mostly some pretty damn good people!

I thought about it,999...whom I have regards for, and how nicely would you tell someone to get off the tracks, there's a train comin' while they have their hands over their ears???

In a kindly tone:
   "A sir, mam, would you so kindly, because you're such a wonderful person, please be smiling and in a great mood while you feel comfortable, at your leisure, to kindly walk over here....the train is only 10 feet away...."

Ya' think??

So the question of "WHY?" as demonstrated here, amongst friends, musical friends, (even better) and the tactics employed, are exactly how WE have been played, misdirected attention...by the crooks, posing as ideologues, selling the argument through their political influencer/hacks, to pull off scams, on the American taxpayers back..after all, we're their credit collateral.

Solyndra,(and the rest) Volt, Immelt/'Jobs Czar'/unelected taking 500B of 'stimulus' to create jobs............in China??...'Shovel Ready'...."Health Care Bill'.....etc etc etc all of it and more, was sold to their supporters as something other than what it was..and is!!

Now as the list gets longer, when will people finally stop assuming its 'one of those guys from the other party that irritates me so much, with his 'argument' about_________(?)whatever.....and start taking a hard look, at what is REALLY happening.
Shit, you'd convict George Zimmerman WITH LESS EVIDENCE!!

So, in closing, maybe it's time that we look at ALL the deceived people for what it really is, and help them..with compassion, even those from the 'other' party..and as human beings....sing to them, and bring their attentions to higher things...and be on the cutting edge. Sooner or later, after it's all over, we might THEN learn to LOVE one another, as if we shouldn't now. Be upfront, honest...so you won't be susceptible of being deceived, yourselves. Just like in music....DO YOUR HOMEWORK. Be the change...no use waitin' for those fuckers to 'bring it to you'!

Oh, and about the part about the 'morons'....:

999: "GfS: it's references like 'jackass moron' which seem to be applied to anyone who disagrees with you that get folks pissed off, that and the occasional lapse into "I have been telling you this stuff for years and it's still not getting through your thick heads."

Actually I wasn't thinking of 'Richard Bridge' or 'Bill D' nor was I in anyway insulting them...and if I in any way implied that, I'm sorry...actually I'm grateful they showed up and gave an outstanding performance, to illustrate a point. They deserve a round of applause. They were great!! Put your hands to-GETH-er!..give it up for 'em!

And Regards to all the players in continuing the dialogue.....on "WHY?"
(it's bigger than ya' think)

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 03:50 AM

Well said GfS.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 04:14 AM

Hey bluesman...you got anything online, in the way of music??

(Now watch....they'll jump my ass for 'topic drift'.............

Anywhere where I can hear ya'?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 04:22 AM

Hi GfS. A friend has two tracks of us up on youtube, I would advise that neither of us divulge too much personal information about ourselves here, especially now with the return of that woman who keeps telling us she will never return here. She has a bit of a fetish for inclusions on social websites.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 04:35 AM

Huh?? which woman??
I'm already up on links here....doesn't matter. I DON'T have a political agenda....just a musical one.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 04:36 AM

....and what kind of sites??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 04:40 AM

The recent arrival to this thread, has issues.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 04:52 AM

Well, she came to the right place! There's plenty of company!!

Personal relationship dynamics??....or a political scum?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 05:04 AM

I have been on the receiving end of her abuse, believe me not pleasant, lucky I am a thick skinned kinda guy. A click on the name can reveal much. Surprised you never had the pleasure her acquaintance.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 05:12 AM

She's probably the lucky one!!....I can hold my own....

You in the UK?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 05:17 AM

"She's probably the lucky one!!....I can hold my own...."


Yes, GfS, wankers usually do, so I've heard....

And as far as 'the websites' I'm on, apart from Facebook, I ain't on any...OFFICIALLY that is, although the bloke you're sucking up to, if you'll pardon the expression makes loads of pages in my name which he sticks all over the place...He does this to others too on mudcat..

May I politely suggest you both 'hold your own' together...

Thank you

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 05:24 AM

Oh hi, Lizzy.
"Why?' Do you guys do whatever you do to each other?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 05:33 AM

GfS,I think you now see what I spoke of. I tend to ignore these unfounded unproven allegations. Let's get the stated subject of this thread back on track and ignore the interruptions. I make allowances for some people, you never know the personal circumstances or hardship of their troubled minds.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 05:42 AM

yeah, We've bumped into each other a few times. sometimes she pops off with a good line...sometimes not too slick..but all in all, we haven't 'exchanged' much. Though sometimes I don't tend to agree with all 'persuasions' and sometimes she goes with the crowd...she's usually been polite to me.....maybe another universe of 'political opinions' but jeez, that seems to be pretty prevalent on here.

Nonetheless, I'm cool with both of you ..I think....

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 05:52 AM

Yes I am in the UK, Originally from Hertfordshire, moved recently to property I own in Medway to oversee a sizable renovation and building project my son undertook in Chatham. More or less there to keep an eye on things. Nice part of the country.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 05:57 AM

Yup...Mark, from Kent...

Hey DO put a video up, old chap and let's see you, shall we? Of course, there's no way we'd know if it is you, but I just thought I'd put the suggestion out there..

GfS...I never 'go with the crowd'..Thank you...and now, I'll leave you to get along with your new found buddie..

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 06:21 AM

As a lightning conductor, this thread is working very well.
God bless Ben Franklin.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 06:31 AM

It may help if the reason for closing a thread is explained at the end of it by the moderator. Giving the reason, either the thread has degenerated from being anything useful other than for flaming and name calling, or it is a thread that has a duplicate already on the site.

I am as guilty as any for drifting too much off topic. Most threads I have been involved in usually consist of constructive criticism.

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 06:36 AM

Hey, I'm goin' to crash...............
G' night...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: GUEST,Bluesman
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 06:40 AM

Sleep well.
Keith.

---

This thread is taking a "time out." It may be reopened later today. Why, you ask? Name calling, trolling, and baiting trolls. No one who has read this far down on this juggernaut is innocent of the facts at hand. --Mudelf

Subject: RE: BS: Why closed threads?
From: Max
Date: 14 Apr 12 - 08:04 PM

There is more for me to review before I fully engage this delightful conversation, but I just wanted to quickly remind all of you that we do not owe you an explanation. Or anything else for that matter.

You see, what happens here, in most of these threads in questions, is a recreational activity known as rhetoric. One sees something on the news or pulls something right from their ass and declares "I contend that this is thus." not because they necessarily do believe that this is thus, but it marks the start of an instance of the game. Think high school debate class. I once successfully argued and won a debate FOR slavery. Please note that me being the better participant does not change the ethics or truth surrounding the issue of slavery.

So when I am asked to give an explanation for why we do the things we do, I am hearing "Come play the game with us."

Now, I am not saying that is what you did here John P, but it delights the players who ready to pick apart our words looking for inconsistencies and duplicity, weakness or other exploitation of policy for a forum built by a 23 year old kid about traditional music, not international politics.

We simply don't have time to play. We're sorry. We are musicologists, enthusiasts, historians and folklorists trying to do research and provide accessibility and preservation here. We're NOT trained, educated, certified or qualified as ideologues, referees, debate coaches or forum moderators and we're doing the best we can towards a goal none of you are even considering.

I actually specifically and strategically obfuscate our policies, finances, procedures, organization structure, tactics, goals and purpose, just so the players are not empowered to fight stupidly with their fine host.

Since no one in their right mind would finance the BS section, it is provided as a luxury by me. I host it and pay for it and defend its existence from my own volunteers and mentors let alone members and guests. I was taught that folklore and tradition cannot be separated from the community in which it is shared, so the BS section was the host of the non-music portion of that community that could later be referenced for personality and perspectives archived in the music section.

Hopefully I have lived a life, participated in my community and generally been visible enough so that if in 100 years someone stumbles over my successful bid for slavery, even though all those words they held in their hands expertly and positively stated such, there will be enough laying about that they'll know that I, me the person, the human being, did not WANT slavery to be allowed.

However, as it is, fewer and fewer folks are agreeing with me about the BS section and Guest Posting, and I am losing patience myself.

Folks like Bluesman are simply cheating at the game by being anonymous they have no accountability therefore anyone of any merit would disqualify every single one of his statements, yet I see fine fine people being worked into a frenzy and the whole lot of us being dragged through the mud for it. There are no consequences for an anonymous man to be wrong, or an idiot.

Bluesman is playing a different game, however, he believes in nothing other than the opposite of what you most strongly do. So with no consequences to his person or reputation possible, he aggressively argues his side, for which we are clear by his anonymity that he is ashamed of. That is cowardice and its defense mechanism on display, for which I feel pathetic and experience pity rather than anger when he speaks. His aim is to make you be willing to publicly humiliate yourself, lose all candor, expose your dogma, be irrational, express anger so that you end up with equal and opposite extreme paths and viewpoints to his radical ideologies game-starting-contentions.

So, in summary, BS threads are a luxury not a right. They are provided and financed by me... you are welcome. We close them when we see something that concerns us. PERIOD. This is not a democracy, we will not open this for public debate. We are sure in our path and sure we are doing right because we are audited yearly by Karma Guard (tm). We have a well respected system of checks and balances and have scored "righteous" on each of the last 5 Karma Analysis with our policies and practices. That's the most we can offer you as reassurance that we are thoughtful, fair, up and up, not slanted, no favoritism, no cultural, political, religious or gender bias within our moderation practices. We work harder at it that you could possibly imagine and strive to get better at it every day. We mourn every single edit, deletion, closure, and interjection and always attempt a human solution over an authoritative or technical one.

It's just that not all of you are human.

And I must admit. I absolutely love and am endlessly amused at the absurd brilliance of this thread being closed.

more soon. ~max